Milo

JUNE 10

Reading 161

SWORD, FAMINE, PLAGUE Ezekiel 4–7

“Because of all your detestable idols, I will do to you what I have never done before and will never do again” (Ezek. 5:9).There are times when the most severe of judgments is absolutely necessary. It was so in Ezekiel’s day. As God’s watchman, the prophet began his ministry by uttering dark and terrible words.

Background

It was not unknown for prophets to act out their messages. In Jerusalem, Jeremiah placed a yoke on his shoulders when calling for submission to Babylon. In Babylon, Ezekiel communicated a certainty of divine judgment by making the street in front of his house a stage, and performing strange acts there. How quickly the gossip would have spread, and members of the captive community would have come by to see and puzzle over the peculiar acts of their eccentric prophet. And, when everyone was talking and wondering what it all meant, Ezekiel would explain in blunt and powerful words. The drama drew the audience. The explanation must have aroused the utmost horror, as well as denial and disbelief. For over a year Ezekiel lay before a rough model of Jerusalem under siege, portraying the final Babylonian attack on the Holy City. It was unnecessary for Ezekiel to explain what his actions meant: the terrible meaning was plain to every observer.

Overview

Ezekiel publicly acted out the siege of Jerusalem (4:1–17) and shaved his head and beard to symbolize the city’s fate (5:1–17). He prophesied against the mountains of Israel where pagan worship services were performed (6:1–14), and then announced plainly that judgment day was here: doom had burst forth (7:1–27).

Understanding the Text

“This will be a sign to the house of Israel” Ezek. 4:1–8.

For some 400 days Ezekiel lay bound, first on one side and then the other before a model of Jerusalem under siege. Each of the 400 days represented a year during which Israel and Judah were to “bear their sin.” If we calculate ahead from the dating Ezekiel uses, the first year of Jehoiachin’s exile, the 400 years ended in 167B.C-the initial year of the Maccabean revolt, which won Judah limited independence from foreign powers. “I will cut off the supply of food” Ezek. 4:9–17. Bread was commonly made of barley or wheat. Bread made by scraping together “wheat and barley, beans and lentils, millet and spelt” was “bread of affliction.” That is, it was eaten only when a people were starving, mixing every scrap of food they could find. During the months Ezekiel was to act out the siege, he was allowed only eight ounces of this bread a day! This tiny ration, and Ezekiel’s own deteriorating condition, spoke powerfully of famine and suffering, to be experienced as Jerusalem fell. The drama Ezekiel performed reminds us that when God judges a society even those who speak up against its sins suffer with the rest. There is no safe place anyone can hide when judgment comes. How much better to speak out before it is too late, and turn our own nation back toward righteousness. “Shave your head and your beard” Ezek. 5:1–17. It was considered shameful in Old Testament times for a man to shave either head or beard. Ezekiel was told to bear the ridicule and reproach. His hair was divided into thirds, and disposed of in ways that illustrated the fate God intended for Jerusalem’s inhabitants (vv. 11–12). Again we sense the horror of sin, not so much by the listing of evils, but by descriptions of the punishments Judah would experience. As the desperate people of Jerusalem turned to cannibalism, eating even members of their own families, we sense a revulsion that captures something of God’s feelings about the acts of sin which led to these terrible consequences. If you and I fail to be horrified at sin itself, and draw back, God will horrify us with the punishment our sins bring! “The mountains and hills” Ezek. 6:1–14. The mountains and hills are singled out in this prophecy because pagan worship sites were located in “high places.” These locations would be the scene of slaughter, and the worship centers constructed there would be demolished. The prophecy is not at all peculiar, in view of the fact that locations have always had symbolic significance to human beings. In our own nation we need only think of Bunker Hill, Valley Forge, and Gettysburg, to realize what great meaning is often attached to places. A place takes on an aura linked to the events that took place there. This is something to consider when we think about our own homes. The mountains of Judah were associated with paganism and immorality. Do we guard our activities at home—and control our TV sets—so that in the minds of family members the place we live is associated forever with love, caring, hospitality, ministry, and righteousness? “Violence has grown into a rod to punish wickedness” Ezek. 7:1–27. The symbolic messages acted out by Ezekiel now give way to an announcement in plain and terrible words. God was about to pour His wrath out on Judah. There would be no escape, for the sword would ravage outside, while plague and starvation stalked their victims within the Holy City. The warning Ezekiel gave is as valid for today as it was nearly 600 years before the birth of Christ. God will certainly “judge you according to your conduct and repay you for all your detestable practices” (v. 8).

DEVOTIONAL

Symbolic Acts(Ezek. 4)

How in the world do we get through to people? It’s a question that’s plagued prophets and preachers as well as ordinary believers from the beginning. Adam couldn’t reach Cain—and Cain killed his brother Abel. Moses couldn’t turn the Exodus generation, and they perished in the desert for their persistent disobedience. Isaiah and Micah and Jeremiah all called on the people of Judah to repent and change their ways. But their exhortations were ignored, and God’s people skipped merrily along sin’s highway—only to die by sword and famine and plague. How do we get through? All too often words just aren’t enough. That’s why Ezekiel acted out God’s message to the exiles in Babylon. They wouldn’t listen to words? Well, they did come to gawk at the gaunt prophet, lying bound beside toy Jerusalem. And to watch him wordlessly grind grains and cook his tiny daily portion of rough bread. They may not have listened. They may not have repented. But at least Ezekiel got their attention. At last they heard what the earlier prophets had been shouting stridently for centuries. That’s why recently my wife and I signed a pledge card, and sent it to the offices of two large companies identified by an impressive coalition of Christian groups as sponsors of TV shows relying on excessive portrayals of sex and violence. That pledge card says that for the next year, we’ll buy no more of their products. And, hopefully, millions of other Christians will sign, and carry out, that same pledge. Oh, the boycott probably won’t win any converts. It may not even bring about any restraint in TV-land. But it is a symbolic act; an act that sends a message a little louder than words. At the very least this act, multiplied by millions, may get someone’s attention. It may say what desperately needs to be said. That the moral boundaries of our society have been shrinking. That sins once publicly decried are now portrayed as normal behavior. And that unless Christians take a stand, and unless our voice is heard, God will surely act against our country too, to “judge you according to your conduct and repay you for all your detestable practices.”

Personal Application

If Christians do not take a public stand for righteousness, who will?

Quotable

“We all like the twilight in spiritual and moral matters, not the intensity of black and white, not the clear lines of demarcation—saved and unsaved. We prefer things to be hazy, winsome, and indefinite, without the clear light. When the light does come difficulty is experienced, for when a man awakens he sees a great many things. We may feel complacent with a background of drab, but to be brought up against the white background of Jesus Christ is an immensely uncomfortable thing.”—Oswald Chambers

Ezekiel

JUNE 9

Reading 160

EZEKIEL’S CALL Ezekiel 1–3

“You must speak My words to them, whether they listen or fail to listen, for they are rebellious. But you, son of man, listen to what I say to you. Do not rebel like that rebellious house; open your mouth and eat what I give you” (Ezek. 2:7–8).Ezekiel’s call reminds us that any person who realizes who God is, is obligated by that knowledge to communicate His Word—whether others choose to listen or not.

Background

Ezekiel was a member of a priestly family deported to Babylon with the captives taken there in 597B.C He was 30 (1:1), the age when qualified descendants of Aaron were permitted to take their place as ministering priests, when God appeared to him in a vision and called him to serve as a prophet. The year was 593B.C, and until the destruction of Jerusalem in 586B.C Ezekiel emphasized Judah’s sin, warning of the coming destruction of the Holy City and its temple. This message was as unpopular in Babylon as Jeremiah’s words were back in Judah. The exiles hoped desperately for a return to their homeland; a hope that was encouraged by false prophets. Yet until the people of Judah acknowledged the full extent of their sin, and gave up all hope of divine reprieve, no spiritual healing or restoration could begin. In Judah, Jeremiah called on the nation to repent. In Babylon, Ezekiel emphasized the importance of individual repentance and recommitment. Like Jeremiah, Ezekiel would face resistance, and know discouragement. There was little glory in being a prophet whose words brought about little change. Yet like Jeremiah, Ezekiel remained faithful to God. And the words he spoke so long ago have great meaning for you and me today. May we, unlike the exiles among whom Ezekiel lived, hear—and respond.

Overview

Ezekiel saw the glory of God in a vision (1:1–28), and was told to speak God’s words to His rebellious people (2:1–9). The reluctant Ezekiel ate a scroll containing God’s words, and was again warned that the Israelites would not listen (3:1–15). Yet Ezekiel was to be a watchman, giving warning, and had to speak when God gave him a message to convey (vv. 16–27).

Understanding the Text

“The likeness of the glory of the Lord” Ezek. 1:1–28.

Ezekiel’s vision has fascinated biblical scholars. It was not unusual for prophets to have visions (cf. Isa. 6). But the content of this vision is unique, and the Hebrew describing it difficult to translate. Briefly, Ezekiel described a great wheeled crystalline platform, resting on four upright living creatures. Each creature had four faces, representing God’s creative work in human, wild and domestic animal, and bird kingdoms. The whole structure moved nimbly but noisily in any direction. Despite the wonder these details may create, the focus of the vision is One seated on a throne resting atop the crystalline platform (called an “expanse” in the NIV). This Person, clearly God, appeared humanoid, but His figure burned so brightly that Ezekiel could see no other details. Even the light surrounding Him, encompassed by rainbow-like radiance, was too overwhelming for Ezekiel to bear, and he fell facedown before the Lord. Artists have toyed with representations of this vision. Scholars have struggled with the Hebrew, and argued alternate translations. Yet Ezekiel moved quickly in his description from the vehicle to its Rider. As awe-inspiring as his details of wheels within wheels and strange living creatures may be, the focus of Ezekiel’s vision is God Himself. It is Ezekiel’s glimpse of God—too glorious to be scrutinized or described—that caused the prophet to fall to the ground in the traditional posture of worship and praise. There are times when our attention is drawn to spectacular settings—grand cathedrals, stained glass, crowds of thousands singing, beautifully staged TV shows—all may perhaps enhance our worship. But at times they may distract our attention from the Lord. The challenge you and I face is to look above these “platforms” for worship, and to view the intrinsic glory of the One they are intended to honor. For our worship to be meaningful, we need to see the Lord and, in awe of His splendor and love, fall down with Ezekiel before Him. “Son of man, stand up on your feet, and I will speak to you” Ezek. 2:1–2. What a stunning verse! “Son of man” here simply means “human being.” In Hebrew “son of” has the meaning, “sharing the nature of.” Here the text emphasizes the fact that Ezekiel, a mere man, is accepted by God! Not only was Ezekiel addressed, but he was told to “stand up.” In the ancient East a person prostrated himself before even a human ruler or overlord. To be told to stand in such a person’s presence was a mark of acceptance and honor. Here God is the One who told Ezekiel, “Stand up on your feet.” Finally, the apparition told Ezekiel, “I will speak to you.” God not only pays attention to a mere man, and lifts him up, but communicates as well! In this one verse we sense the wonder of God’s love for all mankind. God comes to us, for we cannot find or approach Him. He calls to us, despite the fact that we corrupt and puny beings run from Him. He lifts us up, though we should only grovel at His feet. And He speaks to us, communicating His will, that we might participate in bringing righteousness to His universe. It’s good for us to fall down with Ezekiel before the holy God. But it is good too to remember that this God invites us to stand and, even though we are merely human beings, to serve Him as messengers to the rest of mankind. “Do not be afraid of what they say or terrified by them” Ezek. 2:3–8. Even in biblical times words seemed fearful. It’s not as though Ezekiel were in danger of execution. Or of being put in prison. What Ezekiel had to face was simply harsh and hostile words. Angry words, yes. Ridiculing words, yes. But just words. It’s like this in our day. Fear of witnessing to others isn’t quite rational when we stop to think about it. We’re not likely to be beaten for speaking about Jesus. We’re not likely to be fired from our jobs or lose our homes or be imprisoned. The worst that’s likely to happen is that someone may hurl a few hostile words at us, or talk about us behind our backs. And yet so many Christians are literally afraid to speak out. God didn’t ridicule Ezekiel’s fears, and He doesn’t ridicule ours. He simply told the prophet, whose society was far more hardened than our own, “Do not be afraid of what they say or be terrified by them.” And then God reminded Ezekiel of the obligation which was his because of his own personal experience of the Lord: “You must speak My words.” How people respond to our sharing of the Gospel is irrelevant. God’s command to speak is not. “Eat this scroll” Ezek. 3:1–3. Eating the scroll symbolized digesting and applying the words of God. Only when we have taken God’s words to heart can we share them with others. “You are not being sent to a people of obscure speech and difficult language, but to the house of Israel” Ezek. 3:4–15. Ezekiel is the model of an unheralded missionary: a man who evangelizes in his own country. Yes, there’s a need for foreign missionaries. But most Christians are called to minister to people in their own society, whose language and customs are familiar. The eager 20-year-old applying to the mission board for overseas service was asked how many people he had witnessed to during the preceding week. His answer was, “Well, none.” How about the preceding month? Six months? Again, the answer was, “No one.” The chairman of the interviewing board then asked him, “Young man, what makes you think being overseas will make you into a missionary, when you do no missionary work at home?”

DEVOTIONAL

Watchman, Watchman(Ezek. 3)

Some job descriptions are complicated, and others are relatively simple. To help Ezekiel understand the nature of his ministry, God gave him a title belonging to a person whose responsibilities were absolutely clear-cut. Ezekiel was to serve as a “watchman.” This post, though one with heavy responsibilities, required no special skills or training. In biblical times the watchman simply stood on the city walls and, if any danger approached, raised the alarm to warn the city’s citizens. They then were responsible to rally to the city’s defense. Oh, I suppose a loud voice might be necessary. And the ability to stay awake nights. But beyond that, there wasn’t much to the watchman’s job at all. How was Ezekiel to be like a watchman? Well, he was to warn the people of Judah of impending doom: to shout about the danger that approached. Then it was up to those who heard his cries to heed and deal with the danger. As God told Ezekiel, “If you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin” (v. 19). No one could blame the watchman if the citizens, warned about the danger, plugged their ears, rolled over, and went back to sleep! But the watchman, while his job was easy, carried a heavy responsibility. What if danger approached, and the watchman didn’t cry out? In biblical times that watchman rightly forfeited his life! And so the Lord told Ezekiel, if “you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood” (v. 18). Today it’s helpful if we think of each Christian’s “job description” in the same way. It takes no special qualification to serve our neighbors as a watchman. No seminary degree is required. Not even mastery of Scripture, or great spiritual depth. All that’s called for is awareness that friends without Christ are in terrible peril—and a voice to lift to give them warning. We can’t guarantee that any individual will respond. But if we remain silent, we carry some responsibility for that other’s fate.

Personal Application

A word of warning to another clears us of guilt, and may lead him or her to eternal life.

Quotable

“Jesus Christ didn’t commit the Gospel to an advertising agency; He commissioned disciples. And He didn’t command them to put up signs and pass out tracts; He said that they would be His witnesses.”—Joe Bayly

Ezekiel

INTRODUCTION

The Prophet Ezekiel ministered to the exiles in Babylon. His carefully dated prophecies fall between 593 B.C. and 585 B.C. In poetry and in prose rich in allegory, parable, proverb, and prophetic vision, Ezekiel echoed Jeremiah’s call for submission to Babylon. Serving as a watchman, called to give warning of impending danger, the prophet uttered a series of dark predictions concerning Jerusalem’s sin and fall. These ceased when that city fell in 586 B.C., and were replaced by promises of hope for the future. In the first half of the book the theme of Ezekiel’s messages is seen in his review of the moral and religious history of Israel; in the second the theme of hope is expressed in visions of Israel’s restoration and future worship. Three additional themes with particular relevance to today are also woven throughout Ezekiel. These themes are the nature of God, the purpose of divine judgment, and each individual’s personal responsibility for his or her own actions.

OUTLINE OF CONTENTS

I.	Ezekiel’s Call	Ezek. 1–3
II.	Judah’s Judgment	Ezek. 4–24
	A. A watchman’s warnings	Ezek. 4–7
	B. God’s glory departs	Ezek. 8–11
	C. Excuses condemned	Ezek. 12–19
	D. Leadership’s faults	Ezek. 20–24
III.	Foreign Nations’ Fate	Ezek. 25–33
IV.	Future Blessings	Ezek. 34–48
	A. Restoration of Judah	Ezek. 34–39
	B. Restoration of worship	Ezek. 40–48

The Scottish Government is currently considering introducing new hate crime laws, with Holyrood’s Justice Committee asking for views on the proposed Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Bill. The closing date for submissions is this Friday.

The existing law covers race, but Scottish ministers want to extend it to cover all the other ‘protected characteristics’, including religion, sexual orientation and transgender identity.

While Christians would never support genuinely threatening or abusive behaviour, it is difficult to approve of this Bill because of some of the things it includes – not least the new ‘stirring up hatred’ offences. Extending the law in this way will have profound consequences for free speech and religious liberty. These new offences could very easily restrict our freedom to proclaim Christ as the only way of salvation or to call people to repent of sin – even in church.

Chilling effect

It’s also concerning that the Bill does not include key legal safeguards contained in parallel legislation in England and Wales, making this legislation particularly dangerous.

Conduct need not be threatening or even intended to stir up hatred for an offence to be committed. Instead, the Bill captures any abusive behaviour deemed likely to stir up hatred. An offence could even be unwittingly committed in the privacy of your own home. And there is not nearly enough protection for free speech.

Many who oppose biblical truth claim that disagreeing with them amounts to hatred. The proposed ‘stirring up hatred’ offences would give those hostile to Christianity a new tool to try to close down debate and silence Christians.

Such laws, especially in today’s climate, would undoubtedly have a chilling effect on free speech. Think of how it could impact student evangelism, a church’s outreach work or Christians seeking to debate moral and ethical issues.

If this Bill becomes law, a great many people will censor themselves, choosing not to voice their own perfectly reasonable views for fear of offending someone who may disagree. A lawful but unpopular view could soon become too risky to say.

Churches

This poses a particularly difficult problem for Christians, as we know the gospel will be offensive to many. It tells people they are sinful, that their conduct separates them from God, and that there is no way to heaven except through Jesus. And what’s more, Christians can’t shy away from saying that. Romans 1:16 says “I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes”.

This means if Christians stick to their convictions, standing by the gospel and continuing to explain to people what the Bible says about matters such as sexuality and diversity of religions, then they will inevitably offend. Unfortunately, in a culture where people seem increasingly unable to shrug off that with which they disagree, it is only a matter of time before the police are dragged into the matter.

Disturbingly, church services are not excluded from the proposed changes. A Sunday morning sermon where Christ is preached as the only saviour and all religions are said to be false, or where homosexual behaviour is said to be sinful, could see the preacher prosecuted for stirring up hatred.

We are already seeing cases of Christians and others with unpopular opinions being investigated by the police over their views, and this is without such loosely-worded legislation being in place.

It is important that Christians oppose this hate crime Bill by responding to the consultation before it closes on Friday 24 July in order to preserve freedom of religion and expression both for themselves and for the next generation.

The new Hate Crime Bill will make criminals of us all

or the Scottish National party, the phrase ‘nanny state’ is not so much a criticism as an aspiration. This is the party that wanted to assign a state guardian to every child born in Scotland through its ‘named person’ scheme, only to be thwarted by the Supreme Court. Under Nicola Sturgeon’s leadership, there have been repeated attempts to regulate the eating and drinking habits of people, including proposed bans on two-for-one pizza deals and minimum pricing on cheaper alcoholic drinks.

It makes sense, then, that the party’s paternalism should extend to the question of free speech. Scotland’s new Hate Crime and Public Order Bill was ostensibly proposed to repeal outdated proscriptions against blasphemy, but will instead usher in a range of new blasphemy laws by stealth. Most controversially, part two of the Bill pertains to the offence of ‘stirring up hatred’, which criminalises anyone who ‘behaves in a threatening, abusive or insulting manner’ or ‘communicates threatening, abusive or insulting material to another person’.

Moreover, the Bill explicitly allows for intention to be put aside. If behaviour or material is ‘likely’ to stir up hatred against any protected groups (defined by age, disability, racial or ethnic identity, sexual orientation, transgender identity or ‘variations in sex characteristics’) then whether or not the perpetrator intended to do so is immaterial. Even an actor playing a bigoted character could be prosecuted under the proposed laws. An entire section of the Bill is devoted to the ‘public performance of a play’, which specifies that actors and directors can be found culpable if members of protected groups find the material offensive. So if you are troubled by the anti-Semitism of Shylock’s detractors, or the Islamophobia of Tamburlaine’s decision to burn the Quran, you can complain to the Scottish police. Next year’s Edinburgh Festival should be interesting.

The implications for stand-up comedy are similarly dire. As practitioners of an art form that often teases the limits of public tolerance, comedians frequently find themselves involved in free speech battles. The dean of the Faculty of Advocates, Roddy Dunlop QC, has already warned that stand-up would not be exempt from the SNP’s Bill, and that even an old-fashioned ‘Scotsman, Irishman and Englishman’ joke may be perceived as discriminatory. Certainly, some of the more subversive acts that regularly appear at Comedy Unleashed, a night I co-founded in London, would be at risk of prosecution should they venture north of the border.

The Bill even goes as far as to criminalise the possession of ‘inflammatory’ material, which is why senior Catholic bishops have raised concerns that possession of the Bible could become a criminal offence. Let’s not forget that Leviticus 20:13 calls for the execution of gay men.

In a statement that out-Donald-Trumps Donald Trump, the SNP’s Justice Secretary Humza Yousaf has asserted that the Bill ‘does not undermine free speech’, but rather ‘protects it’. Given that this Bill could see those found guilty of ‘insulting’ behaviour imprisoned for seven years, Yousaf’s claim is at once hilarious and disturbing.

‘The Bill does not seek to stifle criticism or rigorous debate in any way,’ writes Yousaf. ‘People will still be able to express controversial, challenging or even offensive views as long as this is not done in a threatening or abusive way that is intended to stir up hatred or likely to stir up hatred.’ None of which addresses the problem of how such vague legislation is apt to be interpreted. In accordance with all official law enforcement guidance in the UK, the website for Police Scotland defines an incident or crime as ‘hateful’ based on the perception of the ‘victim’ (Newspeak for ‘complainant’). If hatred is a matter of perception and not intent, and even the context of dramatic representation is considered irrelevant, how can we possibly safeguard against the abuse of state power?

We must always be vigilant against the introduction of legislation when couched in such vague terms. Yousaf’s stated conviction that ‘free speech itself is never an unfettered right’ strongly suggests that the Bill’s ambiguity is no accident. Even the Scottish Police Federation has warned that its effects would be tantamount to the ‘policing of what people think or feel’, and the Law Society of Scotland had called it a ‘significant threat to freedom of expressions’. That the SNP seem determined to ignore these objections may not be particularly surprising, but it should be a matter of uttermost concern for those of us who still believe in the preservation of liberal values.

WRITTEN BY

Andrew Doyle