334 JILL MIDDLEMAS yHWH and are not found in conjunction with other gods, which are re- ferred to as inanimate and polluted objects with favorite terms includ- ing detestable things, abominations, and dung idols. As well as ex- pressing monotheism, this type of language quite clearly promotes anti- iconism, as I have shown 52. for example, sinful Jerusalem and Samaria as collective representations of the community are con- demned for the veneration of objects that bear stable representations in the form of “a male” (rkz) (Ezek 16,17) and “men” (~yvna) resem- bling the Babylonians (23,14) 53. In addition, the issue of idolatry links the four scenes observed by Ezekiel at the temple and results in divine abandonment and the judgment of the city and sanctuary 54. Moreover, the fall of Jerusalem is attributed to idol worship 55, and the rampant idolatry highlighted throughout the Book of Ezekiel transfers the hope of salvation to the exiles 56. The Book of Ezekiel actually contains many anti-iconic sentiments and represents a lengthy example of the rejection of the cultic use of stabilized images of yHWH and of other gods, which significantly are not granted terms connoting divinity. Distinctive, yet similar, rhetorical strategies are also found in the Book of Hosea, which has some of the most striking depictions of the deity in the Old Testament 57. At the same time, the deity rejects direct equivalence through the blunt statement: “for God am I and not a man! (vya alw ykna la yk)” (Hos 11,9b) 58. In fact, metaphor is used 52 for examples of studies built on Kutsko’s findings that discuss aniconism, see MIDDLEMAS, “Exclusively yHWH”; and ID., “Transformation of the Image”. 53 MIDDLEMAS, “Transformation of the Image”, 126-127. 54 MIDDLEMAS, “Transformation of the Image”, 115-123. Cf. J. MIDDLEMAS, The Troubles of Templeless Judah (OTM; Oxford 2005) 91-93, 110-117. Icons include the “statue of jealousy” (8,3.5), the idols engraved in the wall (8,7-13), Tammuz (8,14-15), and the sun (8,16-18). 55 Cf. T. GANZEL, “Transformation of Pentateuchal Descriptions of Idolatry”, Transforming Visions. Transformations of Text, Tradition, and Theology in Ezekiel (eds. W.A. TOOMAN – M.A. LyONS) (PTMS 127; Eugene, OR 2010) 33-49. 56 T. RENZ, The Rhetorical Function of the Book of Ezekiel (VTS 76; Leiden 1999). 57 C.J. LABuSCHAGNE, “The Similes in the Book of Hosea”, Studies on the Books of Hosea and Amos (ed. A.H. VAN ZyL) (Potchefstroom 1965) 64-76; P.A. KRuGER, “Prophetic Imagery: On Metaphors and Similes in the Book of Hosea”, JNSL 14 (1988) 143-151; H.W. WOLff, “Jahwe und die Götter in der alttesta- mentlichen Prophetie”, Gesammelte Studien zum Alten Testament (TB 22; München 2 1973) 418-441, here 426; ID., Hosea (Hermeneia; Philadelphia, PA 1974) xxiv; B. SEIfERT, Metaphorisches Reden von Gott im Hoseabuch (Göttingen 1996). 58 SEIfERT, Metaphorisches Reden. Seifert’s analysis reveals that God is never