NOTES for Eze 31:1-18
Ezekiel’s prophecy about the fate of Egypt concludes with the parable of the fall of a tall cedar, which repeats in allegorical form the prophecy’s central thought. At the beginning of the parable, the tall and exalted cedar symbolizes Assyria, a cruel power that rose by oppressing the peoples of the Near East. Less than half a century before Ezekiel’s prophecy, Assyria fell under the blows of the Babylonians, and its fall radically changed the entire strategic situation in the Near East.
The second half of the parable uses the same image of the tall cedar to represent Egypt, which rivalled Assyria in military strength and influence. Speaking of the tall cedar’s fall, the prophet compares the destruction of the Egyptian state with that of Assyria, on the basis of the iniquities shared by both powers: idolatry and cruelty. This parable is very characteristic of the biblical attitude towards history: observing history over many centuries, the authors and editors of Holy Scripture find in it confirmation that all power without service to God is doomed to disappear.
It is quite possible that Ezekiel’s words also carry a political subtext which, living in Babylonia, he is compelled to express in the form of a parable. The fact is that the Babylonian empire differs practically not at all from Assyria, Egypt or other ancient empires. Speaking of their common fate, the prophet hints that Babylon will not escape it either. The very next generation after Ezekiel will witness its fall under the blows of the Persians.
Thus the prophet sees two overlapping processes in history. On the one hand, empires as alike as two drops of water succeed one another. Each plunders, displaces and destroys everything in its path, and each perishes, destroyed by the next. It must be said that this sequence accommodates not only Assyria and Egypt, mentioned by the prophet, but also Babylon, Persia, Alexander the Great’s empire, Rome and beyond... right down to the Third Reich and the Soviet bloc. Yet in this succession nothing changes fundamentally, and nothing fundamentally new emerges. For the prophet, therefore, these events are not the essence of history, but merely a background—or a covering—for what the Lord accomplishes in it. What matters most is his purpose, directed towards the salvation of the world. And despite the gravity of the accusations against Israel, God needs it for this great purpose; therefore, while undergoing purification, it does not share the common fate of human states.
In the parable, the prophet speaks of the trees of Eden, of God’s planting. Drawn into the whirlpool of political history, they nevertheless remain different from it in nature, because the meaning of their existence lies not in their greatness but in God. The prophet will say one more word about Egypt and then turn to God’s actions in the destiny of Israel and of the whole world. He will speak of salvation, of the New Covenant and the coming of the Messiah—and how trifling this whole succession of empires will seem by comparison! We cannot fail to note how instructive this parable is in the search for a “national ideology.” Not only individuals, but also countries and peoples, must seek what is worthy of eternity if they are not to share the fate of Assyria and Egypt. And that is the Covenant with God alone.