Ezekiel’s Hope: A Commentary on Ezekiel 38–48

Written by Jacob Milgrom and Daniel I. Block Reviewed By Peter H. W. Lau

Ezekiel is an enigmatic book, with the final chapters among the most difficult to understand. This commentary provides insight into these chapters by offering the following distinguishing features: (1) a holistic reading; (2) insights from Jewish exegetes; and (3) a conversation with the second volume in Daniel Block’s commentary, found in the New International Commentary on the OT series (The Book of Ezekiel: Chapters 25–48 [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998]). Unfortunately, Milgrom passed away in 2010, before he could finish the book. The Milgrom family subsequently asked Block to bring Milgrom’s work to publication.

Milgrom uses an exegetical approach to read Ezekiel which he describes as “holistic” (p. xv); that is, he reads the text with a focus on its final form. This is similar to the approach of Moshe Greenberg, who actually invited Milgrom to complete his series of Anchor Bible commentaries on Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1–20 and Ezekiel 21–37 [Garden City: Doubleday, 1983, 1997]). Within this approach, Milgrom’s assumption is that Ezekiel and/or his tradents is/are the author(s) of the book (p. xv). Any perceived shift in theology within the book of Ezekiel is not attributed to the work of a later redactor but because different circumstances have caused Ezekiel “to change his mind” (p. xv). One example is found in Milgrom’s discussion of God’s presence which changes “from an anthropomorphic kābôd enthroned between the cherubim, to a ubiquitous presence, miškān” (p. 262). I wonder, however, if the prophet does not change his mind, but is rather developing and magnifying the kābôd after the pattern in the tabernacle (Exod 40:34–35) and temple (1 Kgs 8:10–11).

The second distinguishing feature of this commentary is its insights from medieval Jewish scholarship. Milgrom’s main conversation partner is Block (as discussed below), but he also adduces ideas from the Targums, Eliezer of Beaugency, Radak, Rashi and Joseph Kara. Milgrom does not interact in depth with the Jewish scholarship, but the insights are often interesting. Observations from Jewish interpreters include exegetical details; for example, why is it stated prematurely that the sanctuary is within the těrûmâ? Eliezer of Beaugency suggests it stresses that “the temple is no longer in Jerusalem” (p. 252). Insights also include metaphorical meanings; for example, why are the animals included as part of the banquet, although they are not found on Israel’s mountains nor mentioned as victims for YHWH’s banquet? The Targum (followed by Rashi, Kara, and Eliezer of Beaugency) suggests they represent “kings, rulers, and governors, all of them mighty men, rich in possession” (p. 28).

In contrast to most commentaries, the third distinguishing feature is that Milgrom uses Block’s commentary as his main discussion partner. As Block notes, the commentary “is presented as a conversation between the two of us” (p. xix). Milgrom refers to Block so often that the latter’s NICOT volume is simply referred to with page numbers in square brackets. It is almost as if Block’s commentary was the starting point for Milgrom’s. That is not to say, however, that Milgrom agrees with Block on every point. For instance, Milgrom argues that Block’s rendering of haggērîm as “‘proselytes’ must be rejected out of hand, since there is no religious conversion in the Hebrew Bible” (p. 243n76). It is intriguing to see the interaction between two scholars from different faith backgrounds who both work so closely with the biblical text. But it is an overstatement to describe this interaction as “an interfaith dialogue” (as claimed on the back cover of the book) since Milgrom’s Jewish convictions and Block’s Protestant Christian views do not explicitly surface in the commentary.

A few strengths and a weakness of this commentary should be highlighted. As expected given Milgrom’s detailed understanding of the Law, where there are discrepancies between the Law and Ezekiel’s reinterpretation, these are helpfully discussed in great depth. Another strength is the ten excurses found throughout the commentary, covering topics such as “The Leadership Groupings” (pp. 167–77), “Ezekiel, the New Moses?” (pp. 214–18), and “The Mosaic Torah and Ezekiel Compared” (pp. 219–20). Finally, although basic, the twenty-one figures help to clarify the accompanying descriptions. One weakness of this commentary, however, is the suggestion that the temple at Delphi was the primary influence for Ezekiel’s visionary temple. Milgrom presents seven parallels between the temple at Delphi and Ezekiel’s temple (pp. 44–53), but I am not convinced that Ezekiel would have been familiar with the temple of Apollo, and even if he was, that he would use it as a blueprint for a temple of YHWH.

Overall, this is a welcome addition to the body of commentaries on Ezekiel. Block’s NICOT commentary remains the gold standard for Ezekiel. Apart from Block’s, I would recommend others before Milgrom’s (e.g., Iain M. Duguid, Ezekiel [NIVAC; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999]; or at a more devotional level, Christopher J. H. Wright, The Message of Ezekiel: A New Heart and a New Spirit [BST; Leicester: InterVarsity, 2001]). But for those who are interested in insights from medieval Jewish scholars and from this influential, contemporary Jewish scholar, Milgrom’s commentary is indispensable. It may be more suited for graduate students and scholars, though, since it is filled with transliterated Hebrew, not all of it translated.


Peter H. W. Lau

Peter H. W. Lau
Equip Gospel Ministries
Selangor, Malaysia

Other Articles in this Issue

Jesus and the authors of the New Testament consistently link how Jesus’ followers are to live (ethics) with when they live (eschatology)...

Possessing a helpful explanation of the slowness of spiritual change can be encouraging to Christians who are not growing spiritually as quickly or consistently as they might have hoped...

Many have written on the difficulties of pastoral ministry, backed by research into the demise of those who become discouraged in the work...

In light of John A. D’Elia’s A Place at the Table and Stanley E...

A trio of recent books raises important questions on how Scripture is handled in halls of (certain kinds of) learning and how such handling affects Scripture’s perceived truth and message...