True story: When I was in my early university career, I was friends with a girl whose father taught history there. One of his students exhibited a most peculiar propensity in his essays; and that is, that no matter what question he was asked, he always answered, “God did it.”
What caused the Napoleonic Wars?
“God did.”
“Heretic” is a strong word.
As an enthusiastic young believer, I used to hurl the epithet around a fair bit, as did several of my equally enthusiastic friends. We were excited about the things we were discovering in the word of God and determined to practice them. Anyone who didn’t agree with our views of scripture obviously had serious spiritual problems. Perhaps they were merely dull or deluded … or maybe they were the dreaded “H” word.
Yeah, we didn’t do nuance much.
Luke’s gospel tells us the Lord Jesus healed ten lepers in a village between Samaria and Galilee on the way to Jerusalem. At the word of the Lord, these all found themselves remotely cleansed of their disease on the way to show themselves to the priests. That must have been quite a moment.
Nine of the ten were Jews. Perhaps they continued to the priests as instructed, though Luke doesn’t tell us. Their tale ends at the miraculous healing. The tenth turned back, praising God. He fell at the feet of Jesus, giving him thanks. Luke says he was a Samaritan.
.jpg)
“What does the Bible say about ice ages?”
Weather and climate are two different things, a fact deliberately obscured by the Global Boiling true believers and those who make financial use of them.
Weather is short-term. It’s the state of the atmosphere at a given time and place. It happens today, tomorrow or next week. Ask me what the weather has been like this winter and I’ll answer that it’s been close to normal temperatures with perhaps a little more snow than usual.
On at least three occasions, the Lord Jesus told his followers that in order to be his disciple it was necessary they take up their cross and bear it. To his disciples in Matthew 10, he said, “Whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me.” Luke quotes a similar statement made to great crowds: “Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple.”
What’s striking about that in hindsight is that he said it well prior to going to the cross himself.
.jpg)
In a recent post I noted similarities in the Lord’s reaction to Israel’s prayers prior to going into battle against Benjamin and his response to Joshua’s prayer after Achan’s sin led to Israel’s defeat at the first battle of Ai. In Judges 20, it’s quite possible the leaders of Israel’s army lifted the ambush strategy they employed to defeat Benjamin from Joshua’s strategy at the second battle at Ai not many decades prior. That strategy did not originate with Joshua. It came from the Lord. On top of that, the account in Joshua shows the former city of Ai was not far from Bethel, where Israel gathered to pray earlier in this chapter.
Like the sins of Sodom and Gibeah, the two battle accounts in Joshua 8 and Judges 20 have several features in common.
In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.
In this article in The Atlantic, Larry Taunton tells the story of Phil, a young atheist whose reasons for his unbelief sound surprisingly unlike those of the New Atheists.
To me they sound uncomfortably close to home.
Phil had been president of his Methodist church youth group, and loved the Bible studies led by Jim, their youth leader. Jim didn’t dodge the tough chapters or questions. He couldn’t answer every question, but he made the Bible come alive for Phil.
Last Thursday we considered a newly-coined word: “problematics” (and its relatives “problematize” and “problematization”). Social Justice advocates are transforming both secular institutions and churches by showing us we have problems. These problems are all related to racism or discrimination of some sort, and they are invariably systemic.
For the Social Justice advocate, it is not a question of whether we are racist, but in what particular ways. In making this assumption, they neatly sidestep the obligation to prove their case, hoping we will make it right along with them.
Six years ago, I wrote a post reconsidering the meaning of the Tower of Siloam story in Luke 13. You’ll remember eighteen Jews were killed when it fell, and the Lord used this then-current event as a teaching moment, warning his audience, “Unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”
What dawned on me at the time was that the standard “Get saved or you’ll suffer eternal judgment” message we generally hear preached from this passage in evangelical circles doesn’t do justice to the Lord’s original purpose in referencing that sad tale. It is at best a remote application rather than a faithful exposition of the Lord’s intended meaning.
In yesterday’s Anonymous Asks post, I promised to delve a little deeper into the wording of God’s covenant with Abraham. In Genesis 15, the Lord promised Abraham’s offspring a significant parcel of territory delimited by two rivers, the Euphrates and the “river of Egypt”, and further specified in terms of land occupied by ten nations of the day. Yesterday’s post explored what, if anything, that covenant means for modern Israel.
I’d like to back it up just a little further and look at that word “offspring”. Who exactly was the Lord referring to?
.jpg)
“Does Israel have a divine right to ‘much of the Middle East’?”
The shifting borders of modern Israel generate endless public debate. Last Friday, Tucker Carlson referenced a passage from Genesis in an interview with US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee. He asked the ambassador if Israel “had a right” to territory outside its current borders. Huckabee responded, “It would be fine if they took it all.”
From the standpoint of American interests, Huckabee was probably correct. But it was a bit of a foot-in-mouth moment. You can’t say that out loud these days. As usual, the media foamed at the mouth. Politico reported the exchange here.
From time to time these days you will come across online opinion pieces warning about the perils of AI. This is hardly surprising with any technology in its infancy, but artificial intelligence raises hackles more than most innovations for the simple reason that the average person doesn’t understand it. No matter how many times you explain to some users that they are looking at the results of algorithms, not the natural responses of an independent personality, they talk about AI “interactions” as if they have some higher meaning.
I put it down to the failure of Western educational systems over the last forty years to teach math comprehensibly. People who understand the basics of computer programming know AI is all ones and zeroes. People who don’t, don’t.
.jpg)
As we expect from historical narrative, Judges 20 is descriptive rather than prescriptive. The chapter is not loaded with heavy-handed editorializing. At the same time, the New Testament teaches us that at least some of the things Israel experienced are lessons for us today. The apostle Paul writes, “They were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come.”
So, provided what we observe in the story proves consistent with the instructive parts of scripture, let’s see what we can take away for ourselves today. The most obvious lesson I can see here concerns effective corporate prayer.
In which our regular writers toss around subjects a little more volatile than usual.
Immanuel Can: Tom, we need a new generation of spiritual leaders in our congregations. But they don’t seem to be appearing in most places, and not nearly fast enough for the rising need.
Tom: Leadership is definitely a major issue in most churches I’ve visited in the last few years. Sometimes it’s untapped potential that seems wasted, but more often it’s elders aging out without obvious replacements available.
IC: Okay, so what can we do?