Yehezkel and the Jews in Babylon receive the news of the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash. Yehezkel must contend with the claim of the remnant left in the land that they are the ones who will eventually inherit it despite their small numbers.
The claim of the remnant seems to belong to the period preceding the murder of Gedalya, and indicates that they assumed that exile was a matter pertaining only to those now in Babylonia, while they themselves were continuing the national survival of Am Yisrael, and were therefore deserving of possession of the land. The murder of Gedalya brought this claim to an end. They ceased to view themselves as a distinct group that was separate from their brethren in Babylonia.
An understanding of the prophecy in its historical context raises two exegetical possibilities: If Gedalya was murdered in the Tishrei immediately after the destruction of the Mikdash, then Yehezkel’s prophecy – taking place in the month of Tevet – which is no longer relevant. The other possibility is that this prophecy describes the situation in the land at a slightly later stage – not during the weeks immediately following the Destruction. At this time there were still a good number of Jewish inhabitants in the land, and they still viewed their group as an alternative to the Babylonian exiles. This perspective rests upon the assumption that Gedalya was assassinated not in the month of Tishrei immediately after the Destruction, but rather a year or more later.
The prophet does not focus on the Destruction itself; he looks to the past and to the future. The reason for this is that the exiles in Babylonian have not experienced the direct crisis, and they have already begun to internalize the new reality. This is in direct contrast to the prophet Yirmiyahu, who laments at length over the Destruction.
Adapted from "The People, the Prophet, and God in Response to the Destruction" by Dr. Tova Ganzel. Click here to read the full article.