Rev. David Holwick ZF
First Baptist Church
Ledgewood, New Jersey
September 23, 2012
Ezekiel 39:1-6
|
I. I wasn't going to preach this passage.
A. It seems rather esoteric and bloody.
1) I wanted to move directly to Ezekiel's vision of heaven on
earth.
2) Aren't you ready for a little uplift?
B. What changed my mind.
Last week I was listening to National Public Radio and this
passage came up in a political discussion.
Back in 2003, President George W. Bush was seeking allies for
an invasion of Iraq.
One of the chief nations he tried to persuade was France.
In a top secret phone call, Bush asked France's president,
Jacques Chirac, for French troops to join American soldiers
in a war that would be a mission from God.
As Chirac remembered it, Bush told him that "Gog and Magog are
at work in the Middle East... the biblical prophecies are
being fulfilled...."
What is more, "God wants to use this conflict to erase his
people's enemies before a New Age begins."
Chirac asked for some time to think about it.
In reality, he had no idea what Bush was talking about.
So the French government called in a theologian, who explained
that Gog and Magog were satanic agents in the book of
Revelation.
He pointed the president to our passage today and said God rages
against Gog and Magog, who are forces menacing Israel.
God vows to smite them savagely, to slaughter them ruthlessly.
In the New Testament, the book of Revelation envisions all the
nations of the world being gathered for battle against
Israel, but fire comes down from God and devours them.
That was all President Chirac needed to know.
He sent no soldiers to Iraq.
He did, however, describe the episode to a French journalist.
Those who think all conservatives are religious crackpots have
run with it.
A newspaper editor in West Virginia wrote that it's a "goofy
possibility that abstruse, supernatural, idiotic, laughable
Bible prophecies were a factor" in the Iraq War.
#63843
C. Is this prophet goofy, idiotic and laughable?
1) To many educated people, the whole Bible can be described
this way.
2) I strongly disagree.
3) However, the way we use the Bible can cause a lot of
problems.
a) The Bible is a sharp sword that can cut both directions.
b) You must use it carefully.
D. How much can you really get out of the Bible?
1) Not just the plan of salvation, but what about current
political and social events?
2) Does the Bible speak directly to our time?
3) Can we base our foreign policy on it?
a) Can we base our personal decisions on it?
b) Ezekiel 38 and 39 makes a good test case.
1> First, I want to look at an influential scheme of
Bible interpretation.
2> It is the one that is behind most Christian books
on prophecy.
II. The influence of Dispensationalism.
A. It is a big word for a simple idea.
1) To best understand the Bible, you must divide it into
distinct periods.
a) A dispensation is a period of time when God deals with
his people in a particular way.
1> Adam was required to obey a single command.
He didn't.
2> Moses had sacrifices and laws.
3> Jesus offers salvation on the basis of faith alone.
b) Another change comes when Jesus returns to earth.
1> Many Bible passages speak directly of the period
preceding that event.
2> If we are that last generation, we will see their
fulfillment.
2) Dispensationalists also emphasize literal interpretation.
a) When God says something, he means it.
b) We shouldn't water it down by "spiritualizing" it.
1> Every detail of every prophecy will come true.
2> Even if it seems impossible to us, God will make
it happen someday.
B. Dispensationalists believe history has proved them right.
1) Around the time of the American Civil War, they said Israel
would become a nation again.
a) At the time, the area of Israel was governed by Turkey,
as it had been for centuries.
b) A smattering of Jews wasn't going to change that -- at
least, that's what everyone believed.
1> Except for the Dispensationalists.
2) God promised a future Israel, so it would happen.
a) They had to wait 90 years, but they got their wish.
b) Israel became a nation again in 1948.
III. The dispensational interpretation sees much in these chapters.
A. They believe it points to a modern nation - Russia. 38:2
1) "Chief prince" is Rosh in Hebrew, which sounds like Russia.
2) Along the same lines, Meshech and Tubal sound similar
to the Russian cities of Moscow and Tobolsk.
B. The attacker comes from the far north of Israel. 38:6
1) If you take a globe and go directly north of Israel, you
end up at Russia.
2) Russia is still antagonistic to Israel, and remains a
potent polical power.
C. Gog's allies can also be traced to the north.
1) Most of the tribal names in this chapter come from the
descendants of Noah listed in 1 Chronicles 1.
a) If you have ever read Chronicles, this is the part
you want to skip - long lists of names.
b) But among those names is Magog, Gomer, Tubal, Meshech,
Put and Cush. 1 Chr 1:5-8
2) Ancient historians identified these groups with the region
of the Black Sea and southern Russia.
D. Persia is modern-day Iran. 38:5
1) Even today, Russia sides with Iran against us.
2) And we all know how Iran feels about Israel.
IV. The danger of preconceived interpretations.
A. It is easy to read your pet theories into the Bible.
1) This is especially true of esoteric passages like Ezek 38-39,
and Daniel and Revelation.
2) Hal Lindsey's argument for Russia convinced conservative
Americans because we were afraid of Russia.
a) He even gave lectures in the Pentagon.
3) Does this dispensational interpretation hold up to scrutiny?
B. Problems with Hal Lindsey's approach.
1) First of all, the Soviet Union broke up into a million
pieces in 1991.
2) Lindsey identified Gomer with the German people, who used
to be allies (at least in the east) of the Russians,
but no longer are.
3) His identity of Rosh, Meshech and Tubal is fanciful.
a) The names have nothing in common with the Hebrew words.
b) That they sound similar, sort of, proves nothing.
c) Moscow itself is only a thousand years old.
C. The biggest issue is the timing.
1) Ezekiel places the invasion AFTER the return of the Messiah.
a) In chapter 37, the Messiah returns and everyone is at
peace.
b) The towns are undefended.
1> This hardly describes modern Israel.
2> No Messiah and certainly no peace!
2) The book of Revelation does the same thing. Rev 20:7-9
a) Gog and Magog's invasion is AFTER the Millennium.
b) Lindsey and others say there are two Gog and Magogs,
with the later group being an echo of the earlier one.
1> But the Bible only speaks of one, not two.
V. Let the Bible speak for itself.
A. It is wrong to twist it so it becomes more relevant.
1) We all want to think we have found the secret key to Bible
prophecy.
2) We even want to think the Bible contains a specific
passage that explains my life, right now.
a) This is highlighted when someone in distress closes
their eyes, randomly opens their Bible, and jabs
their finger at a verse.
b) Certainly God can use the Bible to speak to our lives.
c) However, it is not a magical book that you can use
hocus-pocus on.
B. Our human interpretations can always be wrong.
1) Also, that our wrong interpretations can have drastic
real-world consequences.
2) Even the Moslems have conspiracy theories based on today's
passage!
C. God's general plan is enough.
1) We can know enough to be saved.
2) You don't have to figure it all out.
=========================================================================
SOURCE FOR ILLUSTRATION USED IN THIS SERMON:
#63843 Rev. David Holwick, adapted from "A French Revelation, or The
Burning Bush," by James A. Haught,
<http://www.secularhumanism.org/ index.php?section=library&page=haught_29_5>
This and 35,000 others are part of the Kerux database that can be
downloaded, absolutely free, at http://www.holwick.com/database.html
=========================================================================
Copyright © 2024 by Rev. David Holwick
Created with the Freeware Edition of HelpNDoc: Free CHM Help documentation generator