Play

The Parable of the Boiling Pot

Wayne Galloway
12/06/20 - Sunday Morning Worship

The Parable of the Boiling Pot

Ezek. 24:3-5

 

Introduction:

 

1.  When I was a child, my dad, my brother and I always went to Mr. Frank’s barbershop.

Mr. Frank was a middle aged, black man, who always looked over the top of his glasses when he cut your hair.  (I always got a buzz.  He could probably have cut my hair with his eyes closed.)

2.  Mr. Frank would often have his family in for the holidays.  He would prepare a country ham, which he regularly purchased from my dad.  My dad was known for his sugar cured country ham.

3.  Mr. Frank invited his family in, prepared his special meal, cooked that country ham and put it on the table, and cut into it only to find that it was hollow on the inside.  Seems that somehow the salt had not gotten into the center of the ham and it had spoiled.  It looked perfectly good on the outside, but inside it was spoiled.

4.  It was an embarrassing set of circumstances both for Mr. Frank and my dad.  My dad gave him his money back with intense apology, small consolation for such an embarrassing situation.

5.  When I read this parable of the boiling pot I am reminded of this story, because of the similarities between what happened to Mr. Frank and what happened in Jerusalem.

 

Discussion:

 

I.  The parable opens with a grand feast being prepared (3-5).

 

     A.  Feasting was common in Israel and Jerusalem was the center of the Jewish festivals.

     B.  The parable describes how a pot was put on.  Water was poured in.  Wood piled under

          the pot and the fire started.

     C.  The choicest of the flock was selected.   Then the high quality cuts of meat were put in,

           the thigh and the shoulder.  The choicest bones were added.  All were vigorously

           boiled together.

     D.  Expectations must have been high.

           1.  The aroma must have been inviting.

           2.  The people were probably telling stories of past experiences and how remarkable

                they were.

           3.  Mouths must have been watering in anticipation.

 

II.  But then the parable makes a drastic turn as the Lord God speaks (6-8).

 

     A.  Instead of the blessing that one might expect on a feast day it is a WOE on the bloody

           city, Jerusalem.

           1.  This is not the first time she is described as bloody city and the reason for this

                description is identified in 22:1-12.

           2.  Life was associated with the blood and therefore the blood was not to be eaten

                (Lev. 17:10-13).  It was to be poured out on the ground, absorbed and therefore

                covered (Deut. 12:16, 24; 15:23).

           3.  But Jerusalem had exposed the blood she had shed placing it on the bare rock. 

                This is a figurative way of saying that she had become a blatant murderer.  She had

                rejected the way of the Lord and gone after the way of Cain (cf. Gen. 4:10; 1 Jn.

                3:12; Jude 11-12).

       B.  The English translations now seem to focus on the pot (9-13).

             1.  The NASB speaks of the pot as rusty.

             2.  But it is a copper/bronze pot.  When copper oxidizes it turns green.  It does not

                  rust like iron/steel.

             3.  The idea seems to be that it is the contents of the pot that is corrupted.  Maybe we

                  need to see the contents as putrid flesh.  Jerusalem probably considered herself

                  “the choicest of the flock” (v. 5) but as it turns out God sees her as putrid flesh. 

                  But even then the images seem to run together, pot and putrid flesh, to the point

                  that the flesh must be poured out on the coals and the pot heated to glowing as

                  the wrath of God is spent on her (13).

 

III.  While God’s judgment is forthcoming it is not capricious.  He would have cleansed them.  Behold then both the kindness and the justice of God.

 

     A.  Verse 13 says, “I would have cleansed you.”  God has always been gracious.

           1.  The whole sacrificial system beginning in the days of Adam has been reflective

                 of His graciousness.

            2.  God is willing to forgive.  Indeed He has given His Son as the satisfaction for our

                 sin.  The text says, “I would have cleansed you, yet you are not clean.”

            3.  They have rejected His forgiveness.

     B.  Now the consequence—verse 14.

           1.  God is gracious to us, but if we reject that graciousness—judgment is the result.

           2.  John says, “If anyone sins we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the

                righteous; and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins” (1 Jn. 2:1-2).

           3.  Heb. 6:4-8; 10:26-31.

     C.  Jerusalem could have been celebrating with a great feast, but feasting had been turned

           into mourning by her rebellion against God.

           1.  There is a great feast prepared for those cleansed by God (Matt. 22:1-14).

           2.  Judgment is prepared for those who reject His grace (Matt. 22:5-7).

 

Conclusion:

 

1.  So what will it be for you—a feast or the fire of God’s wrath?

2.  Take advantage of His grace.