God poses these questions to expose the complete uselessness of vine wood for any practical purpose, establishing the metaphorical groundwork for declaring Jerusalem’s worthlessness. By asking rather than stating, God invites Ezekiel to reach the obvious conclusion himself, making the subsequent judgment against unfaithful Israel more compelling and undeniable.

The text provides no verbal response from Ezekiel. God continues His rhetorical argument in verses 4-5, answering His own questions by noting that if fire consumes both ends and chars the middle, the wood becomes even more useless. The prophet’s silence allows God’s indictment to stand unchallenged.

God’s double question employs the rhetorical device of graduated specificity, moving from general utility (‘any work’) to the most minimal use imaginable (a simple peg). The interrogative form accomplishes what declaration cannot, it forces mental engagement with an inescapable conclusion. The Hebrew construction ma yiluqqach mimmennu ets emphasizes the complete unsuitability of vine wood for any purpose. God asks these questions rather than making statements because Ezekiel (and through him, Israel) needed to arrive at the verdict themselves. The vine’s exclusive purpose was fruit-bearing for the vineyard owner. Stripped of that function, it possessed no residual value. This theological principle carries devastating weight: privilege without faithfulness equals worthlessness. Jerusalem’s covenant status, temple presence, and Davidic lineage meant nothing if the city failed to bear the fruit of righteousness. The questions prepare Ezekiel for the shocking conclusion that follows, God will treat His chosen city like kindling.