Ezekiel 34:2

Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord GOD unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(2) Shepherds of Israel.—This is a common Scriptural expression for rulers, and the whole context shows that these are the persons here intended. In the passage in Jeremiah 23 they are treated under this name separately from the prophets and priests, and also in Jeremiah 2:8 they are distinguished from prophets and priests. The name itself is a peculiarly appropriate one, and seems to have been in use throughout the East, but especially in Israel, from the time when David was taken from the care of the flocks to feed the Lord’s people. (Comp. 2Samuel 5:2; Psalm 78:70-71.)

That do feed themselves.—This selfishness is characteristic of the unfaithful shepherd (comp. John 10:1-17), and is enlarged upon in Ezekiel 34:3-4. The history shows that for a long time it had been eminently true of the rulers, and especially of the kings of Israel.

Benson Commentary

Ezekiel 34:2. Prophesy against the shepherds of Israel — The word shepherd, in the prophetical writings, comprehends both civil and ecclesiastical governors. See notes on Isaiah 56:11; Jeremiah 2:8. Other writers also use the same expression; princes being called shepherds of their people, as well as those who have the immediate care of their souls: see Psalm 78:71-72. Thus Homer calls Agamemnon, Ποιμεναλαων, the shepherd of the people. And as the threatenings here denounced extend to all sorts of governors, so the several sins of the princes, priests, and prophets are reproved, Ezekiel 22:25, &c. Wo to the shepherds of Israel that feed themselves — That regard their own profit and advantage, not the good of the people committed to their charge. The beauty of the original, רעי אשׂר היו רעים אותם, may be expressed in Latin or Greek, though not in English: — pastoribus qui pascunt semet ipsos: τοις ποιμεσιν οι ποιμαινουσιν σαυτους. Plato, in the first book of his Commonwealth, describing the office of a magistrate, saith, “He should look upon himself as sustaining the office of a shepherd, that makes it his chief business to take care of his flock; not as if he were going to a feast to fill himself and satiate his appetite, or to a market to make what gain he can to himself.” Eusebius, in his twelfth book De Preparatione Evangelica, chap. 44., hath transcribed the whole passage, as an exact parallel to this place of Ezekiel. See Lowth.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

34:1-6 The people became as sheep without a shepherd, were given up as a prey to their enemies, and the land was utterly desolated. No rank or office can exempt from the reproofs of God's word, men who neglect their duty, and abuse the trust reposed in them.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Shepherds - Not priests or prophets, but rulers and kings (see the Jeremiah 2:8 note). The most ancient title for "ruler" is a monogram which occurs on the oldest monuments discovered in the cuneiform character. In the Assyrian language it became riu (compare Hebrew רעה râ‛âh equals shepherd). In the traditions of Berosus we find that Alorus, the first king in the world, received from the Divinity the title of Shepherd. The title, as well as the monogram, was preserved to the latest times of the Assyrian monarchy. While the distress and misery of the people daily in creased, the last kings of Judah exacted more and more from their subjects and lavished more and more on personal luxury and show.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

2. Jer 23:1 and Zec 11:17 similarly make the removal of the false shepherds the preliminary to the interposition of Messiah the Good Shepherd in behalf of His people Israel. The "shepherds" are not prophets or priests, but rulers who sought in their government their own selfish ends, not the good of the people ruled. The term was appropriate, as David, the first king and the type of the true David (Eze 34:23, 24), was taken from being a shepherd (2Sa 5:2; Ps 78:70, 71); and the office, like that of a shepherd for his flock, is to guard and provide for his people. The choice of a shepherd for the first king was therefore designed to suggest this thought, just as Jesus' selection of fishermen for apostles was designed to remind them of their spiritual office of catching men (compare Isa 44:28; Jer 2:8; 3:15; 10:21; 23:1, 2).

Matthew Poole's Commentary

The shepherds; the rulers of the people, both political, as kings, magicians, and princes, and also ecclesiastical, priests and prophets.

Israel; the two tribes, and the few that out of the ten did adhere to the house of David.

Prophesy; the command is repeated to encourage and engage the prophet to his work.

Thus saith the Lord God: Ezekiel speaks, but these rulers must know it is God that speaks by him.

Woe be to the shepherds! they have been principal causes of many sins, and exemplary actors in other sins, for which many woes were threatened; many already are come, and the rest will come, in which woes these rulers shall have more than ordinary share.

Feed themselves; contrive their own ease, advantage, honour, and ambitious projects. Let the consciences of these rulers, ecclesiastical and political, speak, ought they not, as shepherds, to take care of the sheep committed to their care?

The flocks; the sheep, both whole flocks and the single sheep, whole societies and particular members of them.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel,.... Or, "concerning" (p) them; the governors of them, as the Targum and Jarchi; their political governors, their kings, princes, and civil magistrates of every order and degree; so Kimchi interprets it of kings; and it was common with the eastern nations, and with the Greeks, to call kings shepherds; and one and the same word; in the Greek language, signifies to feed sheep, and to govern people; see Psalm 78:72, also their ecclesiastical governors are intended, prophets, priests, Levites, scribes, and Pharisees; these were bad shepherds, or they would not have been prophesied against; and though they were shepherds of Israel, this must be done:

prophesy, and say unto them, thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds: that the message to them might be the more regarded, it is ordered to be delivered in the name of the Lord; otherwise they would have been apt to have despised it, and charged the prophet with impertinence and rudeness:

woe be to the shepherds of Israel, that do feed themselves! that is, themselves only, and not the flock: had they fed the flock, as well as themselves, they would not have been blamed; but they took no care of the people over whom they were set only minded their own affairs, to get riches and honour, but neglected the good of the people, yea, cruelly oppressed them:

should not the shepherds feed the flocks? undoubtedly they should; it is their duty, the business of their office, so to do; kings to rule over their subjects, defend their persons and property, and secure their privileges and liberties to them; and ecclesiastical rulers, ministers of the word, should feed the flock or church of God committed to them with knowledge and understanding; see Jeremiah 3:15.

(p) "de pastoribus", V. L. Grotius; "super pastores", Pagninus, Montanus.

Geneva Study Bible

Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say to them, Thus saith the Lord GOD to the shepherds; Woe be to the {a} shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks?

(a) By the shepherds he means the king, the magistrates, priests and prophets.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

2. the shepherds] i.e. the rulers. The term is chiefly used in later writings (Jeremiah 2:8; Jeremiah 3:15); it occurs, however, in Zechariah 9-11, the date of which is disputed. On Zedekiah cf. ch. 17, and on his immediate predecessors, Jeremiah 22:10-30. In general, Jeremiah 23, Jeremiah 25:32 seq.

unto the shepherds] Possibly this is a marginal heading which has crept into the text, cf. Jeremiah 23:9, and the reading may be, thus saith the Lord God, Woe be to … For flocks, flock.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 2. - Prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, etc. Our modern associations with the words, our use of terms like" the pastoral office," "the pastoral Epistles," lead us to think of the priests and prophets, the spiritual guides of the people, as being those whom the prophet has in view. In the language of the Old Testament, however, as in that of Homer ('Iliad,' 1:1. 263; 2:1. 85, etc.), the shepherds of the people are always its kings and other civil rulers (1 Kings 22:17; Psalm 77:20; Psalm 78:71; Jeremiah 23:1-6), and those whom Ezekiel had in his thoughts were the tyrannous rulers of the house of David, like Jehoiakim and Zedekiah and their satellites. Our Christian thoughts of the word are the outcome of the leading of John 10:1-16; John 21:15-17; 1 Peter 5:2-4; Acts 20:28; but it is probably true that even there the original thought is still dominant. Christ is the "good Shepherd," because he is the true King. His ministers are shepherds as being officers in his kingdom. Should not the shepherds feed the flocks? The question is an appeal to the universal conscience of Israel and of mankind. No shepherd was worthy of his name who did not do that which the very name implied. He that neglects that duty is simply as a hireling or a robber (John 10:10, 12). Ezekiel 34:2

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

Woe to the Bad Shepherds

Ezekiel 34:1. And the word of Jehovah came to me, saying, Ezekiel 34:2. Son of man, prophesy concerning the shepherds of Israel; prophesy, and say to them, to the shepherds, Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Woe to the shepherds of Israel, who fed themselves; should not the shepherds feed the flock? Ezekiel 34:3. Ye eat the fat, and clothe yourselves whit the wool; ye slay the fattened; the flock ye do not feed. Ezekiel 34:4. The weak ones ye do not strengthen, and that which is sick ye do not cure, the wounded one ye bind not up, the scattered ye bring not back, and the lost one ye do not seek; and ye rule over them with violence and with severity. Ezekiel 34:5. Therefore they were scattered, because without shepherd, and became food to all the beasts of the field, and were scattered. Ezekiel 34:6. My sheep wander about on all the mountains, and on every high hill; and over all the land have my sheep been scattered, and there is no one who asks for them, and no one who seeks them. Ezekiel 34:7. Therefore, ye shepherds, hear ye the word of Jehovah: Ezekiel 34:8. As I live, is the saying of the Lord Jehovah, because my sheep become a prey, and my sheep become food to all the beasts of the field, because there is no shepherd, and my shepherds do not inquire after my sheep, and the shepherds feed themselves, but do not feed the sheep, Ezekiel 34:9. Therefore, ye shepherds, hear ye the word of Jehovah, Ezekiel 34:10. Thus saith the Lord Jehovah, Behold, I will deal with the shepherds, and will demand my sheep from their hand, and cause them to cease to feed my flock, that they may feed themselves no more; and I will deliver my sheep from their mouth, that they may be food to them no more. - In Ezekiel 34:2 לרעים is an explanatory apposition to אליהם, and is not to be taken in connection with כּה אמר יי, in opposition to the constant use of this formula, as Kliefoth maintains. The reason for the woe pronounced is given in the apposition, who fed themselves, whereas they ought to have fed the flock; and the charge that they only care for themselves is still further explained by a description of their conduct (Ezekiel 34:3 and Ezekiel 34:4), and of the dispersion of the flock occasioned thereby (Ezekiel 34:5 and Ezekiel 34:6). Observe the periphrastic preterite היוּ רעים, they were feeding, which shows that the woe had relation chiefly to the former shepherds or rulers of the nation. אותם is reflective, se ipsos (cf. Gesen. 124. 1b). The disgracefulness of their feeding themselves is brought out by the question, "Ought not the shepherds to feed the flock?" Ezekiel 34:3 shows how they fed themselves, and Ezekiel 34:4 how they neglected the flock. חלב, the fat, which Bochart and Hitzig propose to alter into החלב, the milk, after the Septuagint and Vulgate, is not open to any objection. The fat, as the best portion of the flesh, which was laid upon the altar, for example, in the case of the sacrifices, as being the flower of all the flesh, is mentioned here as pars melior pro toto. Hvernick has very properly pointed, in vindication of the reading in the text, to Zechariah 11:16, where the two clauses, ye eat the fat, and slay the fattened, are joined together in the one clause, "the flesh of the fattened one will he eat." There is no force in the objection raised by Hitzig, that "the slaughtering of the fat beasts, which ought to be mentioned first, is not introduced till afterwards;" for this clause contains a heightening of the thought that they use the flock to feed themselves: they do not even kill the leaner beasts, but those that are well fattened; and it follows very suitably after the general statement, that they make use of both the flesh and the wool of the sheep for their own advantage. They care nothing for the wellbeing of the flock: this is stated in the last clause of Ezekiel 34:3, which is explained in detail in Ezekiel 34:4. נהלות is the Niphal participle of חלה, and is a contracted form of נחלות, like נחלה in Isaiah 17:11. The distinction between נהלות and חולה is determined by the respective predicates חזּק and רפא. According to these, נחלה signifies that which is weak in consequence of sickness, and חלה that which is weak in itself. נשׁבּרת, literally, that which is broken, an animal with a leg or some other member injured. נדּח, scattered, as in Deuteronomy 22:1.

In the last clause of Ezekiel 34:4, the neglect of the flock is summed up in the positive expression, to rule over them with violence and severity. רדה בפרך is taken from Leviticus 25:43, Leviticus 25:46; but there as well as here it points back to Exodus 1:13-14, where בפרך is applied to the tyrannical measures adopted by Pharaoh for the oppression of the Israelites. The result of this (Ezekiel 34:5, Ezekiel 34:6) was, that the sheep were scattered, and became food to the beasts of prey. מבּלי, on account of there not being a shepherd, i.e., because there was no shepherd worthy of the name. This took place when Israel was carried away into exile, where it became a prey to the heathen nations. When we find this mournful fate of the people described as brought about by the bad shepherds, and attributable to faults of theirs, we must not regard the words as applying merely to the mistaken policy of the kings with regard to external affairs (Hitzig); for this was in itself simply a consequence of their neglect of their theocratic calling, and of their falling away from the Lord into idolatry. It is true that the people had also made themselves guilty of this sin, so that it was obliged to atone not only for the sins of its shepherds, but for its own sin also; but this is passed by here, in accordance with the design of this prophecy. And it could very properly be kept out of sight, inasmuch as the rulers had also occasioned the idolatry of the people, partly by their neglect of their duty, and partly by their bad example. ותּפוּצינה is repeated with emphasis at the close of Ezekiel 34:5; and the thought is still further expanded in Ezekiel 34:6. The wandering upon all the mountains and hills must not be understood as signifying the straying of the people to the worship on high places, as Theodoret and Kliefoth suppose. The fallacy of this explanation is clearly shown by the passage on which this figurative description rests (1 Kings 22:17), where the people are represented as scattered upon the mountains in consequence of the fall of the king in battle, like a flock that had no shepherd. The words in the next clause, corresponding to the mountains and hills, are כּל־פּני הארץ, the whole face of the land, not "of the earth" (Kliefoth). For although the dispersion of the flock actually consisted in the carrying away of the people into heathen lands, the actual meaning of the figure is kept in the background here, as is evident from the fact that Ezekiel constantly uses the expression הארצות (plural) when speaking of the dispersion among the heathen (cf. Ezekiel 13). The distinction between דּרשׁ and בּקּשׁ is, that דרשׁ taht , signifies rather to ask, inquire for a thing, to trouble oneself about it, whereas בקשׁ means to seek for that which has strayed or is lost. In Ezekiel 34:7-10, the punishment for their unfaithfulness is announced to the shepherds themselves; but at the same time, as is constantly the case with Ezekiel, their guilt is once more recapitulated as an explanation of the threatening of punishment, and the earnest appeal to listen is repeated in Ezekiel 34:9. The Lord will demand His sheep of them; and because sheep have been lost through their fault, He will dispose them from the office of shepherd, and so deliver the poor flock from their violence. If we compare with this Jeremiah 23:2 : "Behold, I will visit upon you the wickedness of your doings," the threat in Ezekiel has a much milder sound. There is nothing said about the punishment of the shepherd, but simply that the task of keeping the sheep shall be taken from them, so that they shall feed themselves no more. This distinction is to be explained from the design of our prophecy, which is not so much to foretell the punishment of the shepherds, as the deliverance from destruction of the sheep that have been plunged into misery. The repetition of צאני, my flock (Ezekiel 34:8 and Ezekiel 34:10, as before in Ezekiel 34:6), is also connected with this. The rescue of the sheep out of the hand of the bad shepherds had already commenced with the overthrow of the monarchy on the destruction of Jerusalem. If, then it is here described as only to take place in the future, justice is not done to these words by explaining them, as Hitzig does, as signifying that what has already actually taken place is now to be made final, and not to be reversed. For although this is implied, the words clearly affirm that the deliverance of the sheep out of the hand of the shepherds has not yet taken place, but still remains to be effected, so that the people are regarded as being at the time in the power of bad shepherds, and their rescue is predicted as still in the future. How and when it will be accomplished, by the removal of the bad shepherds, is shown in the announcement, commencing with Ezekiel 34:11, of what the Lord will do for His flock.