Apologetics

Providence, Self-Restraint, & Contradictions

There was too much in today’s passage to choose a single item, so here are some quick-hit thoughts on a couple different parts of what we read.

Providence: David and his troops set out with the Philistines on their campaign into Israel, but several of the Philistine leaders do not trust David and send him home. During that campaign Saul and his son (David’s beloved friend, Jonathan) are killed. Note how God used the Philistines to help David maintain his position of innocence in the death of the king to whose throne he stands next in line? God’s providence is incredible. This is why we should praise God for closed doors… and He isn’t done!

Self-Restraint: Because David could not go on the Philistine campaign, he was forced to return home… where he found Ziklag had been raided by the Amalekites (he wouldn’t have known this until it was far too late if he HAD successfully accompanied the Philistines)! Then, with all his 600 men ready to revolt David pauses to consult the Lord. “God, should we go after these raiders?” WHAT? Gut-check time: would you do this? If your family had been abducted would you ask God how to proceed, or would you go full Liam Neeson? I’m forced to admit that I likely would not take the time to consult God here. This is an area of growth for me, at least. Possibly for you as well?

Contradictions: In 1 Samuel and 1 Chronicles we are told that Saul fell on his sword and died after being wounded by a Philistine arrow. But an Amalekite found David and told quite a different story about killing the wounded king would clearly would not survive. What are we to make of this? The Bible is clearly in historical error… better burn it and turn from our faith… right? This is one of those “contradictions” that never made any sense to me. There are two primary theories for how to reconcile these accounts. The one that was proposed by my Bible College Prof was that this Amalekite stumbled upon Saul and his armour bearer on their swords, but not quite dead and finished them off. This is plausible and you can believe this if you find it compelling. I think it needlessly complicates things. This Amalekite lived in Israel as a foreigner and knew that David was heir to the throne of Saul. So, seeing his dead body, took the crowd and armband to David and took credit for the final blow I an attempt to curry favour with David. It… uh… didn’t work.

Have a fantastic day trusting in God’s faithful guidance!

1 Samuel 30-31; 1 Chronicles 9:40-44, 10:1-14, 12:20-22; 2 Samuel 1, 4:4 | 109/365

(Un)Fulfilled Promises?

Today’s reflection delves into a notable aspect of biblical interpretation: apparent contradictions. While some may relish pointing out such instances to discredit the Bible, it’s crucial to engage earnestly with these passages to grasp their deeper meaning.

Let’s examine Joshua 21:43-45, where it’s proclaimed that the Lord fulfilled His promises to Israel, giving them the land and defeating their enemies. However, earlier passages seem to present a different picture. For example, Joshua 13 outlines areas still unconquered, indicating an incomplete fulfillment of promises. Joshua 15:63, Joshua 16:10, and Joshua 17:12-13 further detail instances where enemies remained unconquered or subjugated.

How do we reconcile these apparent discrepancies? One key lies in understanding the Hebrew concept of completed (perfect) and ongoing (imperfect) actions. While the text presents events in past tense, indicating completion, it signifies ongoing fulfillment rather than a one-time occurrence.

Additionally, we must consider the conditional nature of Israel’s possession of the land. Their continued possession was contingent upon faithful obedience to God’s commands, as outlined in Deuteronomy 29-30. Thus, the presence of unconquered enemies reflects Israel’s failure to fully uphold their end of the covenant.

However, amidst Israel’s shortcomings, we find reassurance in the Abrahamic Covenant, an unconditional promise of land boundaries that will ultimately be fulfilled in the eschaton.

In essence, while the Bible may present apparent contradictions, a deeper examination reveals a consistent narrative of God’s faithfulness and humanity’s failure. Rather than dismissing these passages, we’re challenged to engage critically, recognizing the complexities of biblical interpretation.

As we reflect on this, let’s reaffirm our commitment to faithful obedience, understanding that God remains steadfast in His promises, despite our shortcomings.

Joshua 19:49-21:45; 1 Chronicles 6:54-81 | 088/365

The Sun Stood Still… Really?

One of the most contested passages in the entire canon of Scripture. It reads:

Then Joshua speaks to YHWH in the day of YHWH’s giving up the Amorites before the sons of Israel, and he says before the eyes of Israel, “Sun—stand still in Gibeon; and moon—in the Valley of Ajalon”; and the sun stands still, and the moon has stood—until the nation takes vengeance [on] its enemies; is it not written on the Scroll of the Upright, “and the sun stands in the midst of the heavens, and has not hurried to go in—as a perfect day?” And there has not been like that day before it or after it, for YHWH’s listening to the voice of a man; for YHWH is fighting for Israel.
Joshua 10:12-14, Literal Standard Version

I chose the most literal English translations I could find to talk about this passage. Theories to explain this phenomenon abound but I will briefly touch on the five most common ones, why I think rigid literalism is dangerous, and which one I find the most compelling.

Theory 1: The Earth LITERALLY Stopped Rotating

Is this possible? Yes. Of course it is. Any Christian who thinks this is not possible grossly underestimate God. He created the universe, including all the laws of physics that would send a suddenly-stopped earth into chaos the likes of which humanity has never seen before. He could certainly pause all of that as well. Yes this is unequivocally possible! BUT the sheer number of Christians I have seen who say that if you believe anything OTHER than a literal interpretation, you are denying the existence of miracles and therefore the resurrection of Christ and therefore Christianity itself… is staggering to me! If that’s you, please just take a beat and think about this for a moment. My thoughts about any one thing are not equally applied to all things of that type. If I think a patent-leather dress show looks great with a tux, that does not mean I feel the same way about Crocs. Every shoe is no more the same than every miracle is the same.

Again, this is certainly possible for God, but I think it is unnecessary in scope to explain the evidence.

Theory 2: Appearance of Extended Sunlight Only

This theory essentially says that time proceeded as normal, and the miracle that happened was the appearance of extended sunlight to those fighting the battle. Of course if we factor in that verse 9 tells us Joshua attacked in the morning… why would Joshua be asking the Lord for more daylight in the morning? Did he already know that the battle would go on for longer than the typical daylight hours?

This is also possible, but I don’t find this theory especially compelling.

Theory 3: A Solar Eclipse

This is pretty far-fetched to me. Joshua asks the sun to stand in Gibeon and the moon in the valley of Ajalon. Gibeon is to the east and Ajalon is to the west. These are on opposite ends of the sky. This is about as far away from a solar eclipse as we can get, yet we are told that “God listened” to Joshua. By giving him the opposite of what he asked for? This is highly doubtful to me.

Theory 4: Figurative Language

This theory basically holds that the language of Joshua is poetic and symbolic rather than literal. There are times when we see things attributed directly God which are more likely indirectly attributable to God. Perhaps this is another one of those times. Recognizing that things went well in that battle and rightly thanking God for His provision and leadership. This would turn the events into a glorious abstract attribution to God of the victory over their foes. And if I’m honest, I can see why this is so appealing. It neatly sidesteps actually dealing with the problem presented by the text. We no longer need to do the work of sorting out what has happened, and we can instead just say, “God was with Israel” and move on.

But that easy way out is the very reason I also find this theory un-compelling.

Theory 5: A Bad Omen

This theory takes the reader from a 21st century AD world of cosmology and physics into a 14th century BC world of symbols and omens. Joshua, not given to omens but knowing his opponent is, looks into the sky and sees the sun over Gibeon and the full moon over Ajalon. This would have been a fantastic sign to Israel’s enemies that they would be successful in battle… if this were the 14th day of the month. Any other day of the month and this would be a terrible sign. Joshua knew that and also knew that the sun and the full moon would only be visible in the sky together for about 4 minutes. His prayer was that God would hold those things in place long enough for Israel’s enemies to see them and become demoralized by them. If you are interested in additional reading about this theory, a more robust treatment can be found here.

This is my preferred theory. I think it makes the most sense of all the data…. and I love the idea of Joshua and the Lord using the omens and signs and superstitions of their enemies against them. Something very poetic about that in my mind.

In conclusion, feel free to adopt whichever theory you believe makes the best sense of the Biblical data. This is very much a secondary issue. One on which believers can disagree in good faith. Be blessed today my friends!

Joshua 10:1-12:6 | 084/365

Do Babies Go To Hell?

A number of years ago I was recruited by an outgoing youth pastor to join the transition team. My role was to mentor/advise the younger people on the team who were actually running the Jr/Sr High Youth Groups as well as to run the grade 6-12 Sunday School. It was one single class and so required some experience to wrangle.

Anyhow, on my first day I did a get-to-know-you exercise with the 80+ students where they had to tell me their first name, favourite movie, and give me one question they have always had about God, church, or faith. The questions were mostly outstanding. But one in particular has been asked many, many times before.

“Do aborted babies go to hell?”

As soon as the question was asked, the whole assembly demanded I answer it. I initially said that the Bible does not address this topic directly, so we can’t say definitively how God judges this group. You could almost FEEL the tension in the room! But I went on to say that what we know of God’s character as revealed in the Bible leads me to say that there is an ‘age of accountability’ (which is likely different for different people). And before that God will extend grace. I think that those babies will be in heaven with God.

The reason I share this story is because of what we read today. There are two applicable passages:

The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those that are revealed belong to us and our descendants forever, so that we might obey all the words of this law.
Deuteronomy 29:29 (NET)

Gather the people—men, women, and children, as well as the resident foreigners in your villages—so they may hear and thus learn about and fear the Lord your God and carefully obey all the words of this law. Then their children, who have not known this law, will also hear about and learn to fear the Lord your God for as long as you live in the land you are crossing the Jordan to possess.”
Deuteronomy 31:12-13 (NET)

We can see that there are things that God has not revealed to us, the implication is that we are not accountable for those things because we are ignorant of them. Moreover, God asks that the law be read every seven years “so [the people] may hear and thus learn about and fear the Lord your God”. God wants people to choose to give their lives to Him. So, while He extends grace to those who are unable to understand, He also holds accountable those who have seen/heard/had-access-to the truth. Whether that is the General Revelation of His creation or the Special Revelation of His Word.

In summary: No, I do not believe babies will go to hell. That said, I think we underestimate BOTH God’s Grace as well as God’s Justice.

Deuteronomy 29:2-31:29 | 079/365

Excluded from the Kingdom?

If you read Deuteronomy 23:1-8 and are NOT a Biblical savant you probably scratched your head and thought… wut? Seriously. What does this even mean? I’ll put the whole section in here for context:

23:1 A man with crushed or severed genitals may not enter the assembly of the Lord. ²A person of illegitimate birth may not enter the assembly of the Lord; to the tenth generation no one related to him may do so. ³No Ammonite or Moabite may enter the assembly of the Lord; to the tenth generation none of their descendants shall ever do so, ⁴for they did not meet you with food and water on the way as you came from Egypt, and furthermore, they hired Balaam son of Beor of Pethor in Aram Naharaim to curse you. ⁵But the Lord your God refused to listen to Balaam and changedthe curse to a blessing, for the Lord your God loves you. ⁶You must not seek peace and prosperity for them through all the ages to come. ⁷You must not hate an Edomite, for he is your relative; you must not hate an Egyptian, for you lived as a foreigner in his land. ⁸Children of the third generation born to them may enter the assembly of the Lord.

So our list of people who are not allowed to join the assembly of the Lord are 1) eunuchs, 2) a person of illegitimate birth (or their descendants), 3) Ammonites & Moabites (or their descendants, and 4) Edomites & Egyptians (for a little while).

We CAN make sense of this, but it requires a little background knowledge. So let’s look first at what the “assembly of the Lord” is and then why these groups might be excluded.

ASSEMBLY OF THE LORD — I don’t want to belabour this, so let’s do a 10,000-foot overview here. But this does NOT refer to the general Hebrew/Christian/faith community. We see multiple examples of this in Scripture. Not to mention that this passage would then contradict things written both before AND after this passage. Also, while arguments are made for various interpretations of this phrase, I believe that the following is the superior explanation. This “assembly” is a guiding/governing assembly who will direct Israel (cf: Num 16:3; Jud 21:5,8; 1 Ki 12:3; Jer 26:17; Eze 16:40, 23:45-47; Mic 2:5).

So why would these people be excluded from that group?

EUNICHS — There are two primary reasons this group might be excluded. self-castration was closely related to paganism AND since Eunuchs could not have children, I can see why there would be concerns about how they might govern in light of that.

ILLEGITIMATE BIRTH — This was a person born of incest, adultery, or prostitution. These people are from broken homes. God would never exclude these people from his family, He cares for them. But having come from a broken home myself and despite having a dedicated mother who cared deeply about me, I still didn’t understand what made a good father or a healthy family. These people are not in a position to lead a nation. They need to focus on getting themselves straightened out.

AMMONITES & MOABITES — This group proved themselves to be enemies of Israel (as it says in the passage) so they clearly could not be trusted with positions of national leadership!

EDOMITES & EGYPTIANS — Edomites came from Esau, Jacob’s brother and the Egyptians (the people, not the abusive government… always worth remembering that the government ≠ the people) hosted them as sojourners.

Hopefully that helps you understand what I think is the best theory as to why this prohibition is in place AND what it actually IS.

Deuteronomy 21:10-25:19 | 077/365

Are Women Entitled to Anything?

Why do this trio of sisters have to go to nomadic Israel’s equivalent of the Supreme Court to get a ruling on whether or not they can have their father’s inheritance? When reading accounts like this it can be easy to wear our modern lenses and wonder what is wrong with these weird, backward, chauvinists! But the fact is that God is trying to communicate with these people in a language they understand. The idea of a “tradwife” has recently gained some favour in the popular culture. It is essentially an embracing of the “homemaker” role. This is a role that was the primary role of women for centuries. And it’s easy to see why¹; women tend to be more interested in people, and men tend to be more interested in things².

This really only started to shift as modern life was made easier through the use of appliances, amenities and inventions. The advent of the vacuum cleaner, the dishwasher, the washing machine, indoor plumbing, and even the furnace have all made housekeeping some factor more streamlined than it was even 50 or 100 years ago, never mind 6000 years ago! The public school system only started in around 1600 and even then didn’t really gain mass tracking until some time in the 1800s.³ And even the advent of things like infant formula have given mothers the ability to be away from their children in a way that simply wasn’t feasible before. Add to that the invention of the birth control pill… and legal, on-demand abortion… and suddenly women had a level of control that they had never before known.

This is the world that we all know. And have know for the last 50+ years.

None of this was true back then. Couples had very little control over reproduction, children were taught and fed at home. Laundry would have been washed on rocks in running water. And keeping the home warm and the children safe meant someone had to be there to do those things. And this naturally fell to women who tend to be more disposed to childcare and so were home anyway. Men were out farming, and ranching, and killing things to eat. And as the workers, men were also expected to be the providers in a way that we tend not to expect in today’s dual-income families.

What does this have to do with today’s passage? Men were expected to provide. Be it father, husbands, or brothers. They were to take care of their families. So daughters would be taken care of by their husbands (and the inheritances of their husband’s fathers). Since men had an explicit duty to care for the women in their lives, the inheritances were given to them. But in this case there are unmarried, brother-less daughters and an inheritance to be given.

And the men in charge don’t know what to do about this. They can’t give this inheritance to… women!? Can they? The horror!

Here we see so clearly how God is trying to bring people along with a slow, steady, progressive revelation. He’s not tearing the whole system down, just redirecting the people’s effort toward something useful. Trying to help them understand Him using a framework they understand. He really is trying to be gracious. But ultimately God rules as we would today in our modern convenience culture. Of course the women can have their father’s inheritance. It is theirs.

So when you feel like God is being unfair toward women, remember that He is trying to bring change about in a hard-hearted people who can’t even stay faithful to the God who freed them from slavery. In some cases they can’t even stay faithful for 24 hours⁴!

Numbers 27-29 | 067/365

I am not advocating for this role or position. I do not believe it is a necessary part of conservatism, nor do I believe that conservatism is the ideal socio-political position for the Christian to assume. Conservatism is only a good as what is trying to be conserved, and progressivism is only as bad as what it is trying to move toward. ↩︎
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19883140/ ↩︎
1800s in the US. It would take even longer than that in other parts of the world. https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Elementary_school ↩︎
Numbers 16:41 ↩︎

The Stand-In

Just a quick note today; It is fascinating to me that when God visits destruction upon the land of Egypt by sending an angel of death to take the lives of all the firstborn sons, He told the Israelites how to avoid this fate. By marking their doorposts. And so these firstborn sons were spared.

And after this, the Lord said that all firstborn sons were to be offered to Him (and obviously purchased back with another offering), recognizing that the most valuable “first fruits” were the Lord’s.

On an apologetic note, this isn’t because God finds males to be more valuable than females, it’s merely because the PEOPLE at that time (and for a great many years to follow, sadly) valued the males more than the females, and the firstborn were the elite of that group as well.

Anyhow, here again we see foreshadowing of Jesus, as the Lord no longer requires the firstborn male of each family be offered to Him. Instead the Levites (the priests) will stand in for the firstborns.

Hmmm… a firstborn priest who will stand in our place. Very interesting!

Don’t take for granted the price paid to purchase you! God loves you very much. And go share that love with someone else this weekend!

Numbers 8:1-9:14, Leviticus 1:1-3:17 | 047/365

Why Do Good Things Happen to Bad People?

When people propose the oft-asked question, “Why do bad things happen to good people?” there are several assumptions. That bad things exist (who decides what events go into each category), that there are good people (same question as before), and that the aforementioned ‘bad things’ should happen to the assumed ‘bad people’.

We have this sense of fairness that runs through us and the assumption is that “good things” ought to happen to “good people” and “bad things” ought to happen to “bad people”. But that’s not really what happens. The secular world points to this phenomenon and says, “Clearly there cannot be a God (because there is no cosmic justice)!”

There is also an assumption built into this statement: that God has the same goals and values that we do. This is false. Somehow we got it in our heads that God’s desire is NOT to see as many as possible saved from their own sin and destruction, but rather to make a comfortable home for his human pets here on earth.

Job likely had no idea that his experience would be recorded for all time and that people suffering grief and loss would find solace in it’s pages for millennia to come. In fact, I know one young man who found faith by reading the book of Job. When God confronts Job later in the book says, “were you there when I laid the foundations of the world?” this young man was convicted by the Lord and submitted his life to God after recognizing His power and authority, and lack of answerability to His creation.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways,” declares the LORD. “As the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts. — Isaiah 55:8-9 (NIV)

Job 15-18 | 023/365

Whose Will Be Done?

“I admit the deed! — tear up the planks! — here, here! — it is the beating of his hideous heart!” The satisfying release can almost be felt as we reading the thrilling conclusion of Edgar Allan Poe’s ‘The Tell-Tale Heart’. It is the story of a man whose guilt consumes him, until he can do nothing other than admit the deed. His conscience haunted him. It is a similar condition in which we find Joseph’s brothers during today’s reading.

They are struck by the famine Joseph predicted, and so make the trek to Egypt where food has been stored for exactly this occasion. Joseph’s Brothers bring money to Egypt to purchase food as their own supplies have nearly run out. They do not recognize Joseph when they come before him to request to purchase food. Joseph questions the brothers extensively before telling them that unless they bring their youngest brother, they’ll not be allowed to purchase any additional food. So they pay for their portion and head back to Canaan.

Along the way, they find that they have not only the food they purchased, but also the money paid in their bags. A secret blessing from Joseph. But they cannot even receive the blessing, they were still, after all these years, consumed with guilt about what they had done to their brother. It is a curse! they thought, God was surely punishing them. They could never go back.

But eventually they were forced to return. Now we pull God’s careful positioning of Joseph back out of the pocket from yesterday. Because it was during this trip that Jacob revealed himself saying, “God has sent me ahead of you to keep you and your families alive and to preserve many survivors” (Gen 45:7, NLT). Does this mean that God orchestrates evil events to bring about good? Some faithful Christians would say that He does. But I would say that God, in His omniscience, knows what each of us would do in any given circumstance and that He factored in the evil free-will choices of mankind when he providentially arranged the world.

Is it good that you did a bad thing because it achieved God’s Will? No. But God’s Will cannot be defeated by the works of mankind either. His Will be done. Amen.

128k.ca