How does Ezekiel 11:23 challenge the belief in God's omnipresence? Ezekiel 11:23 “And the glory of the LORD rose up from within the city and stood over the mountain east of the city.” The Apparent Difficulty Critics allege that if God’s glory “moves” from Jerusalem to the Mount of Olives, then He cannot be everywhere at once. The text, they say, depicts a limited, spatially constrained deity whose presence is capable of relocation, thereby challenging omnipresence. Immediate Literary Context • Chs. 8–11 record a vision‐sequence in which the prophet witnesses progressive stages of Yahweh’s “glory” (Heb. קָבוֹד, kābōd) withdrawing from the temple (9:3), pausing on the threshold (10:4), hovering at the east gate (10:18–19), and finally resting above the Mount of Olives (11:23). • The withdrawal signals covenantal judgment on Jerusalem’s idolatry (8:9–18) and foreshadows 586 BC, confirmed archaeologically by the Nebuzaradan destruction layer in the City of David (stratum 10; cf. 2 Kings 25:8–9). Biblical Definition of Omnipresence Scripture distinguishes Yahweh’s essential omnipresence from His covenantal or revelatory presence. • Essential Omnipresence: “Where can I flee from Your presence?” (Psalm 139:7–10); “Do I not fill the heavens and the earth?” (Jeremiah 23:23–24); Solomon’s prayer, “Heaven and highest heaven cannot contain You” (1 Kings 8:27). • Revelatory Presence: localized manifestations—burning bush (Exodus 3:2), pillar of cloud (Exodus 13:21), tabernacle glory (Exodus 40:34), temple cloud (1 Kings 8:10–11), and, climactically, the incarnate Word dwelling (σκηνόω) among us (John 1:14). Systematic Theology Parallels • Augustine, Confessions I.3: God is “everywhere whole and nowhere confined.” • Aquinas, ST I.q8.a3: omnipresence concerns essence; “indwelling by grace or glory” concerns manifestation. • Calvin, Inst. I.5.1: “His power shines in the world; His face is shown in His Word.” • Puritan Stephen Charnock, Existence and Attributes of God (I, ch.9): “He may depart judicially while remaining essentially.” Canonical Coherence 1. Return Promise: Ezekiel 43:2–5 shows the same glory revisiting the millennial temple, confirming that departure was disciplinary, not ontological. 2. Christological Fulfillment: Luke 24:50–51 and Acts 1:9–12 place Jesus’ ascension from the Mount of Olives—the very site of Ezekiel 11:23—signifying glory restored through Messiah. 3. Eschatological Consummation: Zechariah 14:4 expects Yahweh’s feet to stand on the Mount of Olives; Revelation 21:3, “Behold, the dwelling of God is with man.” Philosophical Clarification Category mistake: omnipresence refers to God’s relation to space, while Ezekiel narrates a vision in prophetic time‐space symbolism. The movement is analogical, accommodating human perception. It no more limits His essence than a thunderclap limits atmospheric pressure. Archaeology and Geography • The Mount of Olives rises ~60 m above the Temple Mount; its eastern vantage fits the visual motif. • Babylonian siege ramps uncovered at the City of David (Area G, excavations by Y. Shiloh, 1978–82) corroborate the judgment context. • Tel Moresheth inscriptions (7th c. BC) reflect prophetic warnings paralleling Ezekiel’s. Answering Objections Objection 1: “If God left the temple, He vacated Jerusalem.” Reply: Jeremiah still pronounces “I am with you” to the exiles (Jeremiah 29:11). Yahweh’s essence remained; His special blessing withdrew. Objection 2: “Any movement implies spatial limitation.” Reply: Theophanic movement is phenomenological language (anthropopathism). Omnipresence is a metaphysical attribute; theophany is an accommodation to finite creatures. Practical Theology Believers may grieve the Spirit (Ephesians 4:30) yet cannot escape God’s essential presence. Restoration follows repentance, as seen in Ezekiel 11:17–20. Cross-References for Study Ex 33:14–23; Leviticus 26:11–12; Deuteronomy 31:17; Psalm 51:11; Isaiah 57:15; Hosea 5:6; Matthew 23:37–39; 1 Corinthians 3:16; Hebrews 13:5. Conclusion Ezekiel 11:23 does not undermine omnipresence. It dramatizes the withdrawal of covenantal favor while presupposing a God who remains universally present. The passage affirms divine holiness and sets the stage for the ultimate return of glory in Christ, underscoring rather than contradicting the doctrine that Yahweh “fills the heavens and the earth.” |
    |