Fight the Good Fight of the Faith: Refuge!

In the last devotional post, I discussed some reflections on God's dividing up of the land of Canaan--the Promised Land--among the tribes, which is a section that we are going to skip almost completely (except for this one sermon). By ch. 12, God’s people have essentially taken the Promised Land. They have broken the backs of the enemy and destroyed all the strongholds, so the land is essentially theirs, but the individual tribes have to do the “cleanup work,” we could say, of killing or driving out the remaining Canaanites. That means, the land has to be divided between the tribes, which is what chapters 13-22 are all about. And, again, as I mentioned in this past Friday’s post, this is not just a list of territories but a demonstration of God’s redeeming nature. He knows that we are sinful people, prone to fight among ourselves, and inheritance and property is one thing over which even families can become quickly divided: “I want this land,” “I don’t have enough because my family is bigger,” etc., and God cuts through all that by dividing the land proportionally Himself. No one can argue with that.

Now, part of the dividing up of the land is the giving of certain cities to the Levites. The Levites were the tribe tasked with serving God in the Tabernacle, Temple, and for the whole nation, so they did not get a specific territory, for, as the Scripture says in several places, their inheritance was the LORD Himself. However, they did need a place in which to live, so God allots them 48 cities distributed throughout the Promised Land on both sides of the Jordan, which also shows us God’s redeeming nature: He is concerned about the pastoral care of His people. By distributing the Levites throughout the land, He makes sure they are near to all peoples in all the tribes for care like marriages, funerals, circumcisions, and any spiritual guidance the people might need.

Among the Levite cities, God creates a subcategory: cities of refuge. There were to be six of them--three on either side of the Jordan, one in the north, middle, and south (see the map of the Promised Land above). And, these cities are the subject of the chapter for today's sermon: Jos. 20. They were the only place of refuge for someone whose life was being sought--someone was trying to kill them, and they had no place to flee except the cities of refuge. And, while this is still part of the dividing up of the land, which I have mostly skipped, it is a very special part. These cities, in particular, point us to the gospel and the work of Jesus Christ.

If you want to hear more, you can listen to the sermon here or read the transcript here.

I pray that God will use it to magnify His glory in your heart and fortify you for the battles of this Christian life.

By His Grace,
Taylor

Fight the Good Fight of the Faith: Be Strong and Courageous

This past Friday, I began posting my sermon and devotional series on Joshua from the summer. I began with the first devotional, which argued for the historical veracity of the book of Joshua. Now, here is my sermon on the book of Joshua from Jos. 1:1-9, 16-18: "Be Strong and Courageous."

Since this sermon is the first in a series, I began with an extended introduction to the book of Joshua. It was longer than most normal introductions (about 10 minutes), but that is because before we dive into this important book, we need to understand why it is important and how it is applicable to our lives. In short, the book of Joshua teaches about the Christian life--how to fight the good fight of the faith--and if we view this book rightly, it will fortify us for the Christian life. There more detail below and in the sermon.

The book of Joshua tells us the story of God’s people after they had been redeemed from Egypt under Moses and wandered in the wilderness for forty years because of their sinful rejection of God’s promises. It tells us the story of how God’s people entered into the land of Canaan that God had promised to them and began to conquer it. But, more than that, the book of Joshua is a story about a great period of transition for God’s people.

Hundreds of years earlier, God had promised Abraham two things: God would make him a great nation, and He would give him the land of Canaan as an inheritance in which that nation would dwell. The following centuries had seen God’s people vastly grow in number, but they had yet to possess the land of Canaan. In fact, while the Israelites were enslaved in Egypt, it may have seemed like God’s promises would never come true. But, under Moses, God redeemed them from slavery, and under Moses, God formed them into a nation through the giving of the Law. But, there was still that very important piece left: the land. God promised Abraham in Ge. 17:8, “I will give to you and to your offspring after you the land of your sojournings, all the land of Canaan, for an everlasting possession.” And, Deuteronomy promises God’s people that this land will be a place where they can find rest. But, they still needed to possess it. And, this book tells us the story of that great transition: God taking the wandering nation and giving them the physical land that He had promised to Abraham.

So, there’s a lot of history in this book, and it’s a very important time in the history of Israel. That’s why modern Bibles categorize Joshua under the “history” books. But, would it surprise you to know that the Jews didn’t categorize Joshua that way? They didn’t. From the time of King David onward, Joshua was placed in the section of books in the OT called the “former prophets”—they viewed Joshua as prophecy. Now, that sounds a little odd to us because we tend to think of prophecy as foretelling the future, and certainly some prophecy has that component to it. But, by and large, the prophecies of the OT were not so much about foretelling the future but forthtelling about the present, i.e. they took God’s Word written and His mighty works performed and applied them to the lives of the people in the present. Prophecy in Scripture is taking the Word and works of God and saying, “This is how this word from God or these events apply to your life. There is a message God has for you in them, and here it is.” In particular, Joshua is a record of how the Word of God written in the first five books of the Bible—the Pentateuch—began to work in the lives of God’s people as they moved through this great transition, and, in fact, God has a message for all His people in this book.

Now, it’s important for us to grasp that difference because mere history is just a record of facts, from which we might learn something but aren’t necessarily compelled to. But, history that’s also prophecy means this book is meant to convict, not simply inform; it’s meant to compel a response, not merely enlighten with information; it’s meant to encourage, not merely report. It’s a message from God to us as much as it is about God’s work in history.

Now, you might read this book and think, “Well, this book is a whole lot of battles, and that does not really have anything for me. I’m a professor, student, teacher, homemaker, business professional, or something else like that.” We may be tempted to think about the book of Joshua, but nothing could be further from the truth. You see, the taking of the land in this book isn’t primarily about property, but it symbolizes for all the Bible and us the spreading of the Kingdom of God itself, which is far bigger than a small piece of land on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean. The battles and events of this book are seen by the whole Bible as opportunities to learn what faith really is and how we live a life of faith in God. Even for the OT believers who fought these literal battles, it was all about learning to live and fight by faith in their Savior. And, in fact, ultimately it points us to the work of Christ as our King who fought for us and secured the true Promised Land of the new heavens and new earth that all believers—His Kingdom people—will one day possess.

In fact, we are in a great transition just like the Israelites. We stand on the shores of Jordan, you could say, having been redeemed but also having to fight spiritual battles until we’re given our heavenly Promised Land by our King. And, even as Israel stood on the shores of the Jordan as a nation, their battles were still dependent on faith. In every battle in Joshua (and later on in Judges), it didn’t matter if they had inferior numbers, weapons, or strategies, and in fact, on several occasions God commands them to fight that way. We can’t replicate the strategies for Jericho, Hazor, or most of the other battles because they were battles that had to be fought God’s way in faith that God would provide the victory. They still had to fight, yes, but they had to use His strategies in faith that He would make them successful, even when they looked as ridiculous as simply marching around a city and screaming.

In fact, the NT shows us that even the nation and the land for which they fought was merely a temporary fulfillment of God’s promises to Abraham anyway. Canaan could never be the eternal land of rest God promised Abraham. The book of Hebrews shows us that Abraham and the true believers of the OT were never really looking forward to an earthly land but in faith to a heavenly one that Jesus Himself would secure for them through His life, death, and resurrection—the new heavens and new earth that Re. 21-22 describe for us, and that will be eternal rest for us. And, our Savior and His true, eternal Promised Land can also only be possessed by faith.

This is why Joshua has so much to teach us about the Christian life. It‘s a story of God’s redeemed people having to fight by faith in the King who truly fights the battles for them, using God’s ways to possess rest in the Promised Land, which is exactly a mirror of our lives today, although spiritually; not physically. The life of a Christian isn’t something that’s comfortable and easy, and I know you all know that. This life is a relentless, spiritual war that we must fight by faith in our King who truly fights for us, which precedes our eternal rest in the true Promised Land that Jesus secured for us. Church family, from a spiritual perspective, we’re in all-out war—spiritual battles are constant—and Christians have the terrible privilege of being the target of satan—that roaring lion who seeks to devour us, as Peter says in 1 Pt. 5. We do not “wrestle against flesh and blood but against… the spiritual forces of evil,” as Paul says in Eph. 6. Our enemies are no longer literal people that we’re called to drive out like the Israelites, but the Canaanites still exist in here [our hearts] and still need to be driven out. For us, the Canaanites are in our sinful hearts, the temptations of the world, and the attacks of the devil. This is why we need “to fight the good fight of the faith,” as we heard earlier in 1 Ti. 6, looking to our Savior and King who truly fights for us. And, if we see this book rightly as prophecy and history, God can use it to fortify us for the battle of the Christian life. That’s why this book is so relevant for God’s people even today.

If you want to hear more, you can listen to the sermon here or read the transcript here.

 I pray that God will use it to magnify His glory in your heart and fortify you for the battles of this Christian life.

By His Grace,
Taylor

Editing the Human Genome, Bioethics, and Human Life

It is election time, and that, of course, brings a lot of debate, media articles, and (to be straightforward) distraction from other important issues going on in the world. Now, I am not saying politics is not important, but I am saying that sometimes we can get so caught up in candidates, debates, and primaries that we miss other events going on in our world that have equally profound and far-reaching ramifications for humanity (if not surpassing importance).

Such an event has been largely missed by the popular media, and I would argue that is has the potential to affect the human race in a way that far out-weighs any single election in the United States. It is that the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) in the UK has given the Francis Crick Institute the green light to use a gene editing technique called CRISPR to conduct experiments that modify the genome of human embryos.

Yes, you read that correctly: the Francis Crick Institute is going to begin modifying the genome of human embryos with the expressed goal of "understanding the process by which embryos develop... that will help identify causes of miscarriage and infertility." Proponents of the research say that it could help scientists to understand why there is a such a high rate miscarriages, how to eliminate certain diseases, and how to treat infertility more effectively. So, you might ask, "Why is that an issue? Who could be against that?" Well, when we are talking about tampering with the human genome itself, such an endeavor has far-reaching implications that provide quite good reasons to be against it.

I am, of course, not the first person to point this out. In fact, there has been a widespread outcry against these efforts by scientists across the world, calling for a worldwide moratorium on the engineering of the human genome. In an open letter by the Center for Genetics and Society, dozens of scientists across the globe call for such research to be stopped before it does irreparable damage to the human race:

Some suggest that germline modification be allowed for therapeutic purposes but not for “enhancement.”  But the distinction between these applications is subjective and would be difficult or impossible to implement as policy. Permitting germline intervention for any intended purpose would open the door to an era of high-tech consumer eugenics in which affluent parents seek to choose socially preferred qualities for their children. At a time when economic inequality is surging worldwide, heritable genetic modification could inscribe new forms of inequality and discrimination onto the human genome.  

For these reasons, several dozen countries, including most of those with highly developed biotechnology sectors, have explicitly banned human germline modification. The Council of Europe’s binding 1997 Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine also prohibits it. Numerous opinion surveys show that the great majority of Americans and others worldwide believe that heritable genetic modification should be prohibited. 

While we are encouraged by efforts on the part of scientific bodies to move the process of deliberation about acceptable uses of gene editing forward, we are concerned that much of the focus has been on technical issues of safety (implying that if it were safe it would be acceptable), rather than on broader ethical and social implications. We strongly believe that the National Academies’ initiative and international meeting should be considered a very early step of a broadly inclusive program of public discussion. Any recommendations emerging from the meeting or the initiative should make this clear. 

In sum, there is no justification for, and many arguments against, human germline modification for reproductive purposes. We call for a prohibition on such germline modification and a robust and broadly inclusive discussion on the socially responsible uses of this and other emerging genetic technologies. (Emphasis added...)

Check out the open letter yourself to look at the signatures and who is arguing that this is far too dangerous for the human race to attempt. It is not just me or other Christians (and we will get into my reasons in a moment) but scientists from many religious worldviews across the globe. Here we have a group of scientists who understand that just because we have the technology and ability to do something does not mean we should do it. We must think about the implications of our scientific research and weigh that against what good (if any) it might accomplish. In an imperfect world like ours, there are times when we must not pursue some scientific research because whatever good it might accomplish cannot be justified and is far outweighed by the loss of human life, the destruction of human dignity, the unknown affects on the human race, and the implications for human society.

As I alluded above, many Christians have also discussed the ethics and dangers of such an endeavor. In this article, Church and Culture discusses some of the ethical implications of such research. In this one, Anjeanette "AJ" Roberts of Reasons to Believe discusses the implications the image of God has on such research as well as the unknown effects on humanity that such tampering could have. Both of them are worth reading along with the open letter mentioned above, but I would like to add another ethical implication that I have yet to hear discussed: the ethical implications of the process of this scientific research itself.

In a nutshell, this process of research will "deactivate genes in leftover embryos from IVF clinics to see if it hinders development." Basically, using CRISPR, the scientists will deactivate genes, allow the embryo to develop, and then see what happens--how the deactivation of that gene helps or hinders the overall development of the human embyro. (Currently, the growth process of the embryo will take place in a lab because it is not yet legal to insert a genetically modified embryo in a human host. Not yet, but that is the next step.) They must use this process because at our current level of technology, it is possible to isolate certain genes that affect or contribute to certain diseases, defects, or developmental stages, but it is generally not known how those genes function in the overall development of a human or affect the overall development of our genome (i.e. genetic makeup). Genes are not so isolated that one gene only has one function. How particular genes contribute to the overall gene expression of a being is largely unpredictable. So, just because a research group might know what genes affect certain developmental outcomes, they do not necessarily know how those genes affect the development of the entire genome of the individual. That means this research must proceed by making targeted changes to the genome of an embryo and then seeing whether or not the embryo develops properly with the desired outcome.

Now, think about that process as a whole: they will deactivate genes, allow the human embryo to develop (i.e. grow), and see what happens. What we are talking about here is taking a human life (a human person from conception, as I argue here), modifying its genome, and then seeing if it dies or not, develops healthily or not, develops unforeseen side effects or not, etc. It is akin to taking a baby, cutting off its leg, and then saying, "Now, let's what happens as it grows." This research goes even beyond current embryonic stem cell research (which is also a deplorable destruction of human life) because it doesn't just take cells from an embryo killing it in the process; it modifies the embryo and allows it to live on just to see how the modification affects its life. This is slavery at its worst, the likes of which our world, unfortunately, has seen in the past. Perhaps a few historical examples will help put some perspective on this research.

During WWII, the Nazi's conducted experiments on Jews at many of their concentration camps, but the majority were performed at Auschwitz and Ravensbrueck. If you have not read about these experiments, they are not for the faint of heart. Nazi doctors performed all sorts of horrific experiments on those who were considered "untermensch" ("sub-human") to see what would happen and/or to see if they could develop medical treatments that would be beneficial to German soldiers. And, after WWII, at the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, these doctors were tried and convicted of war crimes against humanity. What they did was absolutely deplorable and deserved to be tried as crimes against humanity, but it is not ethically different from what HFEA has just granted the Francis Crick Institute permission to do: experiment on humans to see what will happen and/or try to development medical treatments that will be beneficial for other humans. Just because these humans are less developed physically they the rest of us, just because they do not have a voice to cry out for help, just because they do not have the ability to try to flee the scientists does not mean they are any less human than you or me (cf. the SLED test for more detail on this).

Perhaps one more example from America history will help. Have you ever heard of the Tuskegee syphilis experiment? American physicians studied about 600 black males in Alabama who had syphilis, and they told the men that they were getting "free medical care." What these doctors were really doing was refusing to treat their syphilis so that the doctors could study the progression of untreated syphilis in humans. They let these men suffer and die just to see what would happen--to see how syphilis would progress when untreated. This also was a gross and deplorable misuse of scientific research that cost the lives of hundreds of men, but, again, it is not ethically different from what HFEA has just granted the Francis Crick Institute permission to do.

If the Francis Crick Institute is allowed to continue its research or if others follow suit, then these "left over" human embryos from IVF will become a slave class in our world, kept alive simply for experimentation not unlike what the Nazis did in WWII or what happened in Tuskegee, AL. Yes, the researchers are trying to do good with their experiments, but that does not justify the process. The end does not justify the means--developing treatments for humans by taking human life or, indeed, altering human life and allowing it to develop to see what happens is unacceptable. The end of this research may have profound implications on the human race in the future that we cannot predict, as the above articles and letters show, but even the process of this research itself should be condemned by us.

I hope and pray the outcry of scientists across the globe will bring this research to an end soon, and perhaps this blog post will help in that process. May God have mercy on us for how we treat His images.

By His Grace,
Taylor

Exodus: A Great Salvation -- Who is the LORD?

As we continue through our series in the story of the exodus, let me ask you: What is the most important information you can know in this life? If you could ask one question or maybe actually two and have them immediately answered with complete accuracy, what questions would be most crucial to ask? Well, the text—Ex. 5:1-6:13—for this sermon's post asks those questions and shows us how God answers them.

In the text, we see the two most crucial questions we can ask: one is clear and the other subtle, but ironically, they both come from the lips of God’s enemy: Pharaoh. He asks, “Who is the LORD, that I should obey his voice…” The first words we hear from the mouth of this Pharaoh (who’s not one of the original Pharaohs from chs. 1 and 2) ask the most important question any human being can ever ask: Who is the LORD? Or, who is God? Now, there’s a second, subtle question in Pharaoh’s statement that’s almost just as important: Who am I? Here, Pharaoh sets up one of the major themes of the Pentateuch—the first five books of the Bible—because from here on out, these questions will get answered: Who is the LORD? And, who are His people? Pharaoh needs these questions answered if he’s going to let the people go. The Hebrews need these questions answered if they’re to relate to God, worship Him, and serve Him properly. And, really, every human being needs to answer these questions on some level in order to live and order their life.

If you want to hear more of how Ex. 5:1-6:13 asks and answers these crucial questions, you can listen to the sermon here or read the transcript here. I pray that the Holy Spirit will use it to magnify Christ in your heart and mind to the glory of God.

By His Grace,
Taylor