Since Pastor Chris talked about possible plan of doing Bible Study on Ezekiel as a survey study for Thursdays, I've tried to study ahead.
The Bible Project has good video introduction for this, a two parter:
Part 1:
Part 2:
Recommended readings, by Ligonier:
Patrick Fairbairn, The Visions of Ezekiel (1842), Fairbairn was a prominent Scottish Presbyterian of the 19th century: https://archive.org/details/ezekielandtheboo00fairuoft
Iain M. Duguid's Ezekiel (NIV Application Commentary, 1999)
Derek Thomas' God Strengthens: Ezekiel Simply Explained (Welwyn Commentary Series, 1993)
(The last two I have purchased it on Logos.com)
Chapter 1
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Chapter 4
Chapter 5
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
Chapter 8
Chapter 9
I wasn't able to catch it permanently, but again the pre-Fall Adam's holiness/perfection was touched again, asked by Mary. I'm surprised though the pastor answered her correctly, that Adam was holy, sinless, but missed it when Pete said "But then they did sin", which was ignored by everyone especially the pastor who went on talking about something else, not on purpose. So a lack of sensitivity here has happened. Not ignorance in the deliberate sense. There are different level of perfections. A newborn is perfect with hands and legs and two eyes, etc. But it doesn't mean that he can now be wed. A grown person though maybe physically perfect, but if he's mind is too childish to wed, he is not perfect, a perfect example given by Stephen Tong: The original, created neutral perfection vs. the consummated and perfected perfection.
Chapter 10
Chapter 11
Chapter 12
Chapter 13
Chapter 14
Chapter 15
Chapter 16
In the Thursday Bible study, there's is a shallow answer to that interesting question again: Had Adam not sinned, what would it be like?
The answers given, were in the ballpark of Christ came is better than Adam had not sinned. As if it had been better for Adam to sinned than not sinned. At least that seemed to be the context of the language. Perhaps this was the pastor's influence by Rome's felix culpa, something many protestants would debate and disagree on today.
What's lacking in the conversation was consummation, glorification. Had Adam not sinned, it was not the end. There was still a beginning, that which even we are anticipating. Mark Jones asked this question: The Incarnation Apart From Sin? and seemed to tackle it well.
...just because Christ came to save sinners does not mean he wouldn't have come if there was no sin
The man that God most delights in is the man, Christ Jesus (Isa. 42:1; 1 Tim. 2:5)
For this I would put a new study entry on "Had Adam Not Sinned".
The other thing that also came up was when the pastor brought up the "Jesus loves you" meme in criticism, supporting his take on Ezekiel 16, that Israel thought too big of themselves, that God loved them no matter what. I think this is a weak claim against both the meme as well as the context of the Ezekiel passage. Ezekiel 16 deals more with the sin of complacent rather than pride as God's loved ones. Ezek 16:49 deals with idolatry away from God rather than the question of whether Jesus loves me.
Therefore, I would say it is not wrong to say or for the church to post sign that says "Jesus loves you". Not that I'm not aware of the error concerned by the pastor, but so does so many quotes we use daily that were taken out of context. It is the limitation of human language. Jesus loves you does not and should not convey the message that it's about you, but at the very least, declare the reformed doctrine of God's grace precedes your decision. So without context, the meme fails, and so would so many memes. Sound bites are for those who care, not for the nitpickers. Gene mentioned "common grace", which I assume was his attempt to equate "Jesus loves you" to the reprobates as a kind of common love. I think it's not too far from the truth. Another challenged with the song "Jesus loves me this I know", which stumbled the pastor a bit. Both ideas had came to me before they were presented, I just kept quiet. I would have done no wrong, in telling the reprobate "Jesus loves you" because 1. Because Paul called them saints, though we can be quite certain they were not all elect. When I say Jesus loves you, it is always in the context of hope and not premonition. Even with fellows in Christ, I convey a stronger hope in their salvation when I say "Jesus loves you", but it is still a hope and prayer nonetheless. It can be an encouragement in hope, but never a kind of assurance for salvation of all listeners. 2. Command of the Lord to love your enemies, this overlaps Gene's common grace idea. Overlap, because common grace needs to extend to the Gospel.
Chapter 17
Chapter 18
Chapter 19
Chapter 20
v.9, 14, 22 reminds us of Exodus 32, when Moses called God to blot his own name, for the sake of God's name among the heathens being blasphemed. Here in Ezekiel, it is clear that it was God who was the one initiated this, not Moses. Therefore, Moses was mere unprofitable servant of God in this matter. Nonetheless, this also shows the heart of God known by Moses.
Chapter 21
Chapter 22
Chapter 23
Chapter 24
Chapter 25
Chapter 26