34:1–6 It was common in the ancient Near East for kings to style themselves as the shepherds of their people. Around 1800 BC the ancient Babylonian king Hammurabi described himself in these terms: “I became the beneficent shepherd whose scepter is righteous. . . . I sheltered them in my wisdom, in order that the strong might not oppress the weak, that justice might be dealt the orphan and widow.”223 He claimed that he had been called to serve in that role by the great deities Marduk and Shamash. Similar ideals were intended to guide the king in Israel, who had been placed over his flock by the Lord to lead and take care of it (2 Sam. 5:2). Instead, Israel’s shepherds had used their positions to serve and feed themselves and not the flock. They ruled with “force and harshness” (Hb. khozqah beparek; Ezek. 34:4), a phrase that refers elsewhere to the Egyptian mistreatment of their Hebrew slaves (Ex. 1:13–14) and forbids similar treatment of slaves by Israelites (Lev. 25:43, 46). Yet Israel’s kings had treated not only slaves that way but even the citizens of their own nation! In ancient Israel sheep were raised primarily for wool and milk rather than for meat, so shepherds were not normally expected to eat their flock—but these shepherds are interested more in feeding themselves than in taking care of the flock entrusted to their care (Ezek. 34:3).

As a result of this abusive and neglectful shepherding, the flock of God’s people has become scattered, wandering throughout the earth with no one to search for it (vv. 5–6). In that environment sheep were utterly dependent upon their shepherd to find them food and water and to protect them from the many dangers of the wilderness; a lost sheep would be easy prey for predators and would not last long on its own, which was why it was imperative that a lost sheep be sought by the shepherd at once (cf. Luke 15:4–7).

34:7–16 The Lord promises that he will now step in and judge these former shepherds, removing them from office in order to protect his sheep from their abusive behavior. They will be called to account for their failed shepherding (Ezek. 34:10) and judged for their self-centered behavior. In their place the Lord himself—the “I” in verse 11 is repeated for emphasis—will take on the role of good shepherd, searching out the flock in all the different places to which they have been scattered (vv. 11–12). They have not just wandered off in the perpetual manner of sheep; they have been driven away on a “day of clouds and thick darkness” (v. 12). This phrase describes the manner of the Lord’s appearing at Mount Sinai (Deut. 4:11; 5:22) and the future day of the Lord, when he comes to judge the earth (Joel 2:2; Zeph. 1:15). This suggests, therefore, that the scattering of Israel is itself an act of the Lord’s judgment. This is confirmed when the “gathering” is explicitly identified as a return of the people to their own land from the lands to which they have been exiled (Ezek. 34:13). They will be brought back to the “mountains of Israel” (v. 13), the central spine of the Promised Land that runs north to south throughout Israel and represents the heartland of its territory (cf. ch. 36).

The Lord will not merely regather the flock to Israel, but he will feed it there (34:14)—both actions of a good shepherd. In imagery reminiscent of Psalm 23 the Lord will feed the flock with good pasture and cause it to lie down in good grazing land. Not only will he seek the lost and bring back the scattered; he will also bind up the injured and strengthen the weak among the flock (Ezek. 34:16; cf. Isa. 40:11). However, the coming of a good shepherd is not good news for all the sheep. The fat and strong sheep, who have used their strength to oppress the weaker members of the flock, will be destroyed at his coming. He will “shepherd”224 them with justice, giving them what they deserve (Ezek. 34:16)!

34:17–21 This last thought is expanded into a judgment oracle against the “rams and male goats” (v. 17)—the fat sheep, who have oppressed the weaker ones (v. 20). These are a wider circle of leadership within the community, those who have held significant power in the years leading up to Jerusalem’s destruction—to the point that even the king is not entirely in control of the nation. In Jeremiah 38 King Zedekiah summons Jeremiah to a secret consultation but admits that he has very limited power to protect the prophet against his powerful enemies in court (Jer. 38:24–27).225 In such a context the king as shepherd is not the only guilty party; the leadership class has abandoned its responsibility to take care of the weak and poor (cf. Jer. 7:6). This is described by means of two metaphors. First, the strong sheep have eaten all the good pasture and drunk the clear water first, muddying the remainder so the weak sheep are left only with mud-covered grass and soiled water (Ezek. 34:18–19). That is, the strong have seized all the best resources for themselves and barely even given the leftovers to their weaker brothers. Second, they have butted the weak sheep with their horns and shoved them with their shoulders until they have been driven away and scattered abroad (v. 21). That is, they have used violence and mistreatment to oppress the weak. Those without influence or power in the community are abused and exploited, while the rich become richer and the strong became stronger. The shalom of their society has been shattered in favor of a “might makes right” philosophy.

34:22–24 As we will see repeatedly in Ezekiel’s vision of the future of God’s people, the sins of the past are exposed and confronted before a reassurance is given that the future will be radically different, based on the Lord’s intervention to set things right.226 In this case that means replacing the past failed leadership of Judah’s kings with a new leader, a new David—the king after God’s own heart (1 Sam. 13:14). This is not an alternative to the Lord’s being his people’s shepherd; it is the mechanism by which the Lord will be their shepherd, saving them from their external enemies and judging with fairness and equity internally, so that justice and equal treatment extend to all. David here represents the ideal figure of such a king.227

This new ruler is here called a “prince” (Hb. nasiʾ; v. 24) rather than a king (melek)—not, as some have thought, because his powers are significantly diminished over the earlier situation (he will still be the people’s “shepherd,” not merely a fellow sheep) but to indicate a change in the kind of occupant to be expected.228 Here is a ruler who will be “raised up” (form of Hb. qum) as a worthy successor for David, fulfilling the promise of the Davidic covenant that the Lord would raise up (same form of Hb. qum) an offspring for David and establish his kingdom (2 Sam. 7:12, 25; cf. Jer. 33:14–15; Amos 9:11).

34:25–31 The result of this change in leadership—and the ensuing change in society more broadly—is described as a “covenant of peace” (Ezek. 34:25). The covenant made at Mount Sinai was originally intended to bring shalom (“wholeness”) as the people kept its decrees and statutes and received its blessings (Lev. 26:4–13). Unfortunately, it had been experienced as a “covenant of destruction” as it rained its curses down on a disobedient people (Lev. 26:14–35). This is particularly true for Ezekiel’s generation, as the curses have climaxed in the destruction of Jerusalem and exile from the land (cf. Lev. 26:33). These Sinai covenant curses will now be lifted, including the threat of wild animals (Ezek. 34:25), drought (v. 26), the sword (v. 28), and famine (v. 29), to be replaced by security, prosperity, abundant rain and crops, and deliverance from their enemies. This is a “new” covenant, like that of Jeremiah 31:31–33, not because it is unrelated to the one made at Sinai but insofar as it fulfills the primary goal of the Sinai covenant: I will be your God and you will be my people (Ezek. 34:30; cf. Ex. 6:7; Lev. 26:12; Jer. 31:33). Yet, unlike Jeremiah 31, the focus here is not so much on a transformation in the nature of the people so that they have the law written on their hearts; it comes instead through the provision of a new king, whose sovereign leadership accomplishes the change in their status from cursed to blessed.

In addition to fulfilling the Davidic covenant (Ezek. 34:23) and the Sinai covenant (vv. 25–30), the Lord’s future intervention to provide Israel with a new king will reach back all the way to the beginning and fulfill the covenant made with Adam. Verse 31 could be rendered, “‘You are my sheep, the sheep of my pasture; you are Adam and I am your God,’ declares the Lord God.” In the language of Psalm 100:3,

    Know that the Lord, he is God!

    It is he who made us, and we are his;

    we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.