In the thirtieth year, in the fourth month, on the fifth day of the month: It is clear that there is a problem with the date in this first verse of Ezekiel. If this date is counted from the time the exile began (so New Century Version), as all the other dates in the book are, it is the latest date in the book (that is, 567 B.C.), even though it is placed at the beginning. In addition, it is placed immediately before the date in verse 2, which is the earliest in the book (that is, 593 B.C.).

At first sight it seems that this date should refer to the same time as that in verse 2. If that is the case, the thirtieth year cannot refer the thirtieth year of the exile. It must refer to a different event, even though Ezekiel has not told us what event he had in mind. Scholars and translators have made many guesses about what this thirtieth year refers to. Some claim it refers to the time when the High Priest found the Book of the Law in the Temple and King Josiah reformed the worship of the Jews (see 2 Kgs 22.3–23.25). Others suggest that in this verse Ezekiel used a different dating system, based on the Babylonian calendar, because the book was written in Babylonia. Others say that it indicates Ezekiel’s age at the time, that is, he was 30 years old; this interpretation is found in the footnote of New International Version as well as (La Bible Pléiade) and several other French translations. Some others claim that this date refers to the time when the book was finally compiled and edited into its present form. Still others suggest that this verse actually belongs to one of the later visions in the book, for example, chapter 37 or 43, and for some reason it was misplaced.

Unfortunately, none of these suggestions has a solid enough basis for us to follow it with any confidence. Therefore most translations have not specified what the thirtieth year refers to (except for Bible en français courant and Parole de Vie, which say “my thirtieth year”), and some, such as Good News Translation and New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh, have added a footnote to explain this. Since we have no way of knowing, we recommend that translators leave the issue open, if possible, and not specify what the thirtieth year refers to. If necessary, a footnote may be included. This is a problem in languages that must specify from when the thirty years is being measured. In those languages translators must say simply “after thirty years,” and leave the beginning point unknown. Likewise in the fourth month may be rendered “after four months” or “in the fourth month of that year.”

As I was among the exiles by the river Chebar: Ezekiel saw the vision of God while he was in a prisoner of war in Babylonia. This clause seems to say that he was with a group of fellow exiles (compare 8.1; 14.1; 20.1). But here he mentions no eyewitnesses, and after the vision the Spirit lifted him up and carried him to Tel-abib, where the exiles were living (see 3.12-15). Therefore a general term should be used for among to show that Ezekiel was “in the community of” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh) or “living with” (Good News Translation) the exiles, without implying that he was actually in their presence at the time.

The exiles were the Jewish people who were taken from Jerusalem when the king of Babylonia defeated Jerusalem in 597 B.C. and took away the king of Judah and all the royal family, together with the leaders of the people, the soldiers, and the skilled workers. Only the poorest people were left behind (see 2 Kgs 24.10-16). He took them as prisoners to Babylonia and did not allow them to return to Jerusalem. Many of them apparently lived in a village called Tel-abib near the Chebar Canal. The Hebrew word rendered the exiles is a singular noun. It has a collective sense here, referring to “the community of exiles” (New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh). Translators will do well to retain this impression of the exiles living together in a community. If the idea of exiles is unknown, translators may say “the people who were forced to leave their land and live in Babylonia.” Note that “Babylonia” refers to the country or kingdom of which Babylon was the main city. For this reason some languages may need to say “the country of Babylonia.”

It is not absolutely certain where Ezekiel was when he had this vision. The river Chebar was a long artificial canal that was built to irrigate the plain between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. If possible, the word chosen to translate river should make it clear that it was something man-made, not a natural river, but it must not imply that it was just a small ditch. New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh has “the Chebar Canal.” If a language has a way of referring to a canal, then translators should use it. However, translators may also say “the Chebar River” (Good News Translation). The community of exiles lived by the river Chebar, that is, on its banks or near it.

Ezekiel’s vision of God was made possible when the heavens were opened. Revised Standard Version closely follows the Hebrew in which the word for heavens is plural. Many translators will find it more natural to use the singular word “sky” (Good News Translation), which is what the Hebrew word for heavens means here. The text does not say who opened the sky, but if a language requires an agent, that is, an indication of who did so, translators can probably understand that it was God. Rather than saying directly that God did it, it is better to say “I saw that heaven [or, the sky] was open” or “I saw the sky opening.” However, it is also possible to say “heaven opened” or “the sky opened” of its own accord (so Good News Translation).

And I saw visions of God: Ezekiel then had visions of God. The Hebrew verb for saw implies that he actually saw something with his eyes, but it can also carry the meaning of perceiving something internally, not with the outward senses. It is often used with visions and divine revelation. Instead of visions of God, some early versions used the singular expression “a vision of God” (so also Good News Translation, New English Bible). They took this phrase to refer only to the vision in chapter 1, in which Ezekiel saw the vision of God. Most other versions follow the Hebrew text and use the plural word visions. They understand it to apply to all the visions in the book. But in some of the visions God is not the object of the vision, so some versions have rendered this phrase as “visions from God” (Revised English Bible, Jerusalem Bible/New Jerusalem Bible). Both visions of God and “visions from God” are legitimate renderings (so Hebrew Old Testament Text Project), especially if the reader understands the verse to refer to the whole book. Another possible sense for this phrase is “divine visions” or “a divine vision” (Anchor Bible [Anchor Bible]), in which the Hebrew word for God is understood as an adjective to show what kind of visions they were, that is, they were “supernatural.” If this concept is not well known, translators may render this clause as “and God showed himself to me.”

Many languages will need to follow Good News Translation and introduce Ezekiel’s name in this verse, rather than in verse 3. Some translators will find it more natural in their language to reorder the verse as follows:

• In the thirtieth year, I, Ezekiel, was among the Jewish exiles on the banks of the Chebar River. It was the fifth day of the fourth month. The sky opened and I saw visions of God.

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

On the fifth day of the month (it was the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin): Another dating formula appears here. It is in the third person and gives a definite date, that is, the fifth year of the exile of King Jehoiachin, which was 593 B.C. This formula is very similar to those in Hag 1.1 and Zech 1.1. In those books it functions as a heading for the following vision. Here in Ezekiel it functions in the same way.

However, this formula lacks the number of the month, and scholars usually assume that it was left out because it was the same as that in verse 1, that is, the fourth month. This is a reasonable assumption, but there is no way to be sure. Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version have followed this assumption, for they also omit the reference to the fifth day, because that too is the same as verse 1. This leaves Good News Translation and Contemporary English Version with only the reference to the fifth year, which they use to make the uncertain date in verse 1 specific. This is undesirable, because the date in verse 1 is so uncertain, as we have seen. It would be better to keep the uncertainty by keeping the two dates in these two verses separate. New International Version has done this by beginning a new paragraph at verse 2.

After the uncertainty of the first date in verse 1, Ezekiel more carefully records here the date of the vision he is about to describe. It was nearly five years after the Babylonians had taken King Jehoiachin, Ezekiel and many others as prisoners. For those translators who include footnotes in their Bibles, it is appropriate to indicate that this date was probably July 31, 593 B.C. The fifth year means that it was at least four years but not yet five. Therefore Contemporary English Version is incorrect with “Five years after….” Good News Translation gives a better model with “It was the fifth year since….” Another possibility is “Nearly five years after….”

This verse may be translated as follows:

• Nearly five years after King Jehoiachin was deported [or, taken into exile], on the fifth day of the month….

• Nearly five years after Nebuchadnezzar took King Jehoiachin as a prisoner to Babylonia, on the fifth day of the month….

However, translators should follow the most natural order of recording dates in their own language.

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

The word of the LORD came to Ezekiel: This is a common way of introducing a prophecy. In this instance, unlike some other passages, the word of the LORD does not refer to the message of the whole book, but specifically to the vision in chapters 1–3. Here it has a more restricted meaning, which may be expressed by rendering this clause as “the LORD spoke this message to Ezekiel.” New Living Translation has “The LORD gave this message to Ezekiel.”

The LORD (when it is printed in uppercase letters) is used by almost all English versions to render “Yahweh” (YHWH in Hebrew), the name of God. Translators who choose to follow this practice will generally use a respectful term for someone who has authority over others, for example, “our Owner,” “the Owner of the people,” “the Master,” “the Chief,” or “the Boss.” We recommend that translators use the name “Yahweh” whenever the English versions have “the LORD,” even though it may sound strange at first.

The name Ezekiel means “God strengthens.” The Hebrew text refers to Ezekiel in the third person. Many versions have found it more natural to use first person, since he is speaking in verse 1 (so Good News Translation, Bible en français courant). Models that use first person for this clause are “I heard Yahweh speak,” “I received a message from Yahweh,” “Yahweh gave me this message,” and “Yahweh spoke to me.”

The priest: Ezekiel had become a priest before the people were taken into exile five years earlier, since only at the Temple in Jerusalem could someone become a priest. In the Old Testament the office of the priesthood was limited to the tribe of Levi, and more specifically to one family of that tribe, the family of Aaron. The priests served as intermediaries between God and the people of Israel. Regulations with regard to the qualifications of priests are given in Lev 21.16-23. They offered sacrifices and conducted other sacred ceremonies. The word priest is often rendered “sacrifice-making person” or “ceremony person.”

Ezekiel was the son of Buzi, but apart from this we know nothing of Buzi. He was probably a priest also. In the Hebrew text the title priest can be applied to either Ezekiel or Buzi, that is, the text can mean either “Ezekiel the priest, the son of Buzi” (so Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation) or “Ezekiel, the son of Buzi the priest” (so Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch and the footnotes in Contemporary English Version and New International Version). But since the Hebrew priesthood followed the family line from father to son, it is likely that both Buzi and Ezekiel were priests. Almost all the versions just say that Ezekiel was a priest.

In the land of the Chaldeans by the river Chebar: The land of the Chaldeans is more commonly known as “the land of the Babylonians” (New International Version) or “Babylonia” (Good News Translation, Contemporary English Version). It covered the territory between and around the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers at the head of the Persian Gulf and is now part of southern Iraq. Babylonia was ruled by Nebuchadnezzar, and he took many of the people of Judah there as prisoners, after he defeated Jerusalem in 597 B.C. That is why Ezekiel was in Babylonia when he received this vision. For by the river Chebar, see Ezek 1.1.

The hand of the LORD was upon him there: In the Old Testament the hand of the LORD is the means by which Yahweh shows his power and his presence. This phrase or a similar one is used seven times in the book (1.3; 3.14, 22; 8.1; 33.22; 37.1; 40.1), and each time it is connected with Ezekiel receiving a divine message. In 3.14 it is also described as being a heavy burden for him (compare Psa 32.4; Isa 8.11). Translations must not give the impression of a physical hand of God grasping Ezekiel by the arm or throat. Rather, this clause should be rendered as idiomatically as possible with the sense of the presence and power of Yahweh being on Ezekiel; for example, Good News Translation has “and I felt his power.” Another possible model is “and Yahweh’s power was in me.” Once again Good News Translation shifts from third person to first person for Ezekiel. In fact, some Hebrew texts and early versions have the first person here, saying “and the hand of the LORD was upon me there.” If the first person is read, this clause would be connected to verse 1. Then the intervening material must have been inserted by an editor. But if the third person is read, verses 2 and 3 were inserted by an editor. In either case, the meaning is the same, so translators can render all three verses in a way that is natural in their language.

A possible model that combines verses 1-3 is:

• I am Ezekiel, the son of Buzi. I am a priest. After Nebuchadnezzar took King Jehoiachin and many of our people into exile in Babylonia, we were living by the Chebar Canal. We were living there for nearly five years. On the fifth day of the fourth month of the thirtieth year, the sky opened and I saw visions of God. On the fifth day of that month, Yahweh spoke directly to me and I felt his power on me.

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

As I looked: This clause ties verse 4 formally with the previous verses, but it is best to begin a new paragraph at this point, because verses 1-3 function as a heading for the book as a whole. This clause may be rendered “I looked” (New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “In my vision” (Revised English Bible), or “Here is what I saw” (Bible en français courant). Good News Translation has “I looked up,” which can give the wrong impression that Ezekiel had been looking down.

Behold renders the Hebrew word hinneh. This word provides some dramatic emphasis and vividness to the description of the vision.

A stormy wind came out of the north: A stormy wind is a violent windstorm or thunderstorm. Although there is no suggestion of rain, this wind must not be confused with a dust storm. In many languages “a storm” would be understood to be a rainstorm. Translators may also say “a violent wind” (Parole de Vie) or “a strong wind.” It was coming out of the north, that is, moving toward the south.

And a great cloud, with brightness round about it, and fire flashing forth continually is literally “a great cloud and fire flashing and brightness around it.” Along with the wind there was a great cloud, which was probably like a big cumulus thunderhead, and the fire flashing forth continually was the flashing of lightning. The brightness round about it was “a bright light around it” (New Century Version), but it is not clear what this light was surrounding. The Hebrew word order suggests the bright light was surrounding the lightning, but the grammar requires that it was surrounding the cloud. Thus the approaching storm cloud flashing with lightning was surrounded by very bright light.

And in the midst of the fire, as it were gleaming bronze: At the center of the lightning (fire), not of the cloud, was something that looked like gleaming bronze. It is not clear exactly what this was, as the following list of renderings for the Hebrew word translated gleaming bronze shows: “bronze” (Good News Translation, Jerusalem Bible), “brass” (Revised English Bible), “amber” (King James Version / New King James Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), “electrum” (New American Bible, Septuagint), “polished metal” (Contemporary English Version), “glowing metal” (New International Version, New Century Version, New American Standard Bible), “glistening gold” (Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch), and “flashing copper” (Luther 1984). But there is no doubt that it refers to something very bright, sparkling and gleaming like molten or polished metal. The best alternatives are “bronze,” “brass,” and “glowing metal,” but, if they are difficult for any language, it would be acceptable to render this whole clause as “and in the center of the fire it was very bright [like metal in a hot fire].”

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Their legs were straight probably means the four creatures had human legs, and they were standing upright with their legs straight, not bent at the knees. They were not animals standing on their hind legs, because the back legs of most animals are crooked. The Hebrew is not absolutely clear at this point. Literally it reads “And their legs [were] a straight leg,” which some scholars have suggested means that each creature had only one leg; for example, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “the legs of each were [fused into] a single rigid leg.” Very few translations follow this interpretation. It is better to follow Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation here.

And the soles of their feet were like the sole of a calf’s foot: The soles of their feet is better rendered “their feet” (New International Version, New Century Version; similarly New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh), which looked like the hoofs of calves. The Hebrew word for calf refers to a young bull, but if it is more natural, translators may say “bull.” The important thing is that this clause refers to the cleft hoofs of cattle. Good News Translation provides a helpful model here, saying “and they had hoofs like those of a bull.”

And they sparkled like burnished bronze: The pronoun they probably refers to the hoofs of the four creatures. Their hoofs were bright and shiny, and they reflected the light like burnished bronze, that is, highly polished bronze. Good News Translation and New Living Translation use the verb “shone” rather than sparkled. If burnished bronze is not known, translators may say “metal polished very bright.” A model for this whole clause is “and their hoofs were very shiny like metal that had been polished until it was very bright.”

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Under their wings on their four sides they had human hands: The creatures also had human hands (it is best to understand this to include arms, not just hands), but it is not certain how many hands each creature had. Many translations understand that each creature had four hands, one underneath each of their wings. But it is also possible that each creature had only two hands, which were visible under their wings; for example, New Jewish Publication Society’s Tanakh says “They had human hands below their wings.” If so, there was a pair of human hands on each of the four sides of the group of the four creatures, as they stood with wings touching, forming a square, and supporting the throne of God above them (see verses 22-27). Translators who wish to follow this interpretation may render the first half of this verse as “Each creature had [a pair of] human hands under its wings. There were hands on all four sides [of the group] of the creatures.”

And the four had their faces and their wings thus: In verse 6 Ezekiel began to describe the four creatures, and he mentioned that they each had four faces and four wings. He then went on to describe their legs and their hands, but here at the end of verse 8, he returns to their wings and faces, which he describes in more detail in the next four verses (9-12). Revised Standard Version is strained here. Better renderings are “All four of them had faces and wings” (New International Version, New Century Version) and “The faces and the wings of the four creatures were like this.”

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Their wings touched one another: Translators must take care not to give the impression that each creature spread out all four wings. In verse 11 it is clear that two wings were extended and two wings were used to cover the creature’s body. Many languages will have to follow Good News Translation and make this clear already in verse 9. But others will simply follow the text here, saying “They touched one another with their wings,” “Their wings were touching,” or even “The tips of their wings were touching each other.”

Each creature had its wings extended, touching the tips of the wings of the creature on each side with its wing tips. But the creatures were not standing in a straight line. They were standing with their backs to each other, and when they spread out their wings, they formed a square. We cannot tell exactly how the square was formed. Perhaps the creatures were standing in the four corners of the square with their wings extended partly backwards to form the sides of the square. Or perhaps the creatures were standing on the sides of the square with their wings extended sideways, so that their wing tips touched each other at the corners of the square. It is this shape that Good News Translation is trying to make clear by saying “Two wings of each creature were spread out so that the creatures formed a square, with their wing tips touching.” But since we cannot know for sure whether the creatures were positioned on the sides or at the corners of the square, and both formats fit equally well with what is described in the rest of the chapter, translators can choose the diagram that makes most sense to them for their language.

They went every one straight forward, without turning as they went means the four creatures moved as a group without turning their bodies to face the direction the group was going. Each creature was facing in a different direction. Therefore, whichever direction the group went, one of the creatures was facing that direction, and the other three creatures did not need to turn around to enable them to go in that direction. Contemporary English Version has a helpful model here, saying “They moved together in every direction, without turning their bodies.”

Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .