CHRISTMAS EVE AND THE ADVENT OF THE SAVIOR OF THE WORLD

My wife and I went to a Christmas Eve service at a local church – the type where it is easier to find a leprechaun than a pew Bible. The church was packed and we watched them as they took Communion, wondering whether they believed that they were singing about the Savior of the world.

However, it wasn’t this way for the shepherds in the field on what seemed to be a very ordinary night. Suddenly the boredom was shattered by the presence of an angelic messenger and the glory of the Lord.

The lowly shepherds, who had been living with their sheep in the fields, were perhaps by now, covered with dew. Instead of filling them with excitement, this divine appearance filled them with terror. Why? This was always how people experienced the presence of God. At the manifestation of God upon Mt. Sinai, the Israelites were so terrified that they thought they would die. The entire Mosaic sacrificial system informed Israel that they could not approach God without being struck dead. After all, they were still in their sins – they were under a curse – and their holy and righteous God had not yet been satisfied. Instead, He was breathing wrath.

·       But the angel said to them, “Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. (Luke 2:10-11)

They would no longer have to fear the presence of the Lord because the promised Messiah had already come, and it was time to celebrate. He would save them from their sins, something that the Law had been unable to do. The marriage between God and His people had begun. They would now be enabled to approach their Savior.

·       And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!” (Luke 2:13-14)

Peace? Yes! What kind of peace? Between God and His people! The Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6) had finally arrived in the most unlikely way – in a smelly manger, swaddled with strips of cloth meant to wrap the dead. The symbolism was unmistakable to the shepherds – a Child born to die, just as the sacrificial sheep, which they had been shepherding.

It was now grabbing my heart.  He is also my Savior. I hadn’t been waiting for Him, but He had been waiting for me to come to the end of my hope. I knew that I was an utter failure and felt deeply ashamed of myself. It was so tormented that it was hard for me to come into the presence of others, let alone the presence of God. I so hated myself that I was sure that others hated me.

However, this suffering, this consuming shame, this insecurity has been eradicated by the advent of this Child who became sin for me. Consequently, He is precious to me. He must have also been to the lowly shepherds who had been invited into His presence to celebrate His advent.

What He has done for us is very tangible:

·       Therefore, brothers, since we have confidence to enter the holy places by the blood of Jesus, by the new and living way that he opened for us through the curtain, that is, through his flesh, and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. (Hebrews 10:19-22)

Consequently, we need no longer dread the presence of God. We can stand tall, even in the face of persecution. We know who we are, and no one can take that away.

I wondered whether the congregants of this church were just going through the motions. Did they understand what they were doing here and who they were singing about? I wanted to scream out, “Do you realize who this Child is,” but I didn’t.

OBSERVING CHRIST’S BIRTH – IS IT WRONG?

Can I take my wife out on Valentine’s Day? For her birthday? For our anniversary? More to the point of the season, can we celebrate Christ’s birth?

Against the celebration of Christ’s birth, some Christians have argued:

1. It has accrued the trappings of both paganism (12/25 observance) and Catholicism (ChristMASS).

2. It is not mandated by Scripture. Instead, it is a human tradition.

Let’s first address number 1. There are many things that we have received from other religions – language, script, mathematics, and even our church buildings, some of which had previously been used for illicit purposes or by other religions. Certainly, using these is not defiling. Therefore, the fact that the observance of Christmas on December 25 is borrowed from paganism to give pagans an alternative to pagan worship is not anti-Scriptural, although it is non-Scriptural.

But is there room for the non-Scriptural in our lives? Of course! There are many things that we do that are non-Scriptural, like driving in cars and using air-conditioners, ball-point pens, pianos, or even wearing three-piece suits and baseball caps.  

However, a problem arises when we take our practices or traditions and raise them to the level of Scripture, thereby making them authoritative. The Jews of Jesus’ day had many traditions, like wiping the dust off their feet in disapproval. The Jews of the Old Testament also had their traditions like first marrying off their oldest daughter or giving the bulk of their inheritance to their firstborn son. In themselves, these practices weren’t criticized by Scripture. Why not? Because they weren’t wrong in themselves and didn’t compete with Scripture.

In contrast to this, the Pharisees had elevated their human traditions to the level of Scripture. Therefore, Jesus castigated them:

• Jesus replied, "And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition?...  You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:  "'These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'" (Matthew 15:3-9)

If I were to “break the command of God for the sake of [the] tradition” of celebrating the birth of Jesus,” I would be at fault. Also, if I were to make this tradition mandatory, I would be illegitimately raising it to the level of Scripture, something we must not do! However, we can celebrate the birth of our Lord without doing this.

Number 2. Scripture even commends certain human traditions. God had told his Prophet Jeremiah to go the Recabite clan to offer them wine – something allowable under the law. However, they refused to drink it.

• But they replied, "We do not drink wine, because our forefather Jonadab son of Recab gave us this command: 'Neither you nor your descendants must ever drink wine. Also you must never build houses, sow seed or plant vineyards; you must never have any of these things, but must always live in tents. Then you will live a long time in the land where you are nomads.' We have obeyed everything our forefather Jonadab son of Recab commanded us. Neither we nor our wives nor our sons and daughters have ever drunk wine or built houses to live in or had vineyards, fields or crops. We have lived in tents and have fully obeyed everything our forefather Jonadab commanded us. (Jeremiah 35:6-10)

Did the Lord castigate this clan for obeying extra-biblical traditions? Not at all!

• Then Jeremiah said to the family of the Recabites, "This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: 'You have obeyed the command of your forefather Jonadab and have followed all his instructions and have done everything he ordered.' Therefore, this is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: 'Jonadab son of Recab will never fail to have a man to serve me.'" (Jeremiah 35:18-19)

Do we do wrong to honor the coming of the Son of God into this world to save us from our sins, even though this is not mandated by Scripture? Certainly not! Instead, narratives our Savior’s birth are highlighted by two of the Gospels and many Old Testament passages (Isaiah, 7:14; 9:6-7; 11:1-10; Micah 5:2).

The shepherds in the field had come to celebrate the birth of the Christ. They had even been directed to do so by an angel. The Magis were led by the appearance of a strange star to come and celebrate the birth of the Savior. It certainly is evident that the Lord had directed them to come to celebrate our Savior's birth. Why not also us?

Although the church can be censured for the way that we celebrate Christmas, it is entirely unbiblical to censure the observance of Christmas.

Swaddling Cloths, a Child Born to Die, and Christmas

In His Sermon on the Mount, Jesus surprisingly preached:

• “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.” (Matthew 5:3-5)

This message is perplexing. Instead, we would suppose, “Blessed are the rich in spirit, the non-mourners, and the proud.” How instead can it be that the humble mourners will be blessed?

Humble shepherds had been selected to be blessed by a glorious announcement:

• And there were shepherds living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night.  An angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were terrified.  But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in [swaddling] cloths and lying in a manger.” (Luke 2:8:12)

What a strange and surprising message. The promised Messiah – the hope of Israel – would be born in a filthy, smelly, fly-infested animal stall. No humbler circumstances could be envisioned! But there was another feature of this announcement that would have been even more startling. He would be “wrapped in swaddling cloths” as a “sign” to them. How would this constitute a sign? Babies have to be clothed in something, don’t they? Why not swaddling cloths? This would constitute a powerful and unimaginable sign that he was born to die:

• The swaddling clothes were typically used on new-born lambs that were bred for sacrifice. The shepherd would swaddle the lamb and place it in a manger until it settled down from the birth. This would protect it from possible injury that would disqualify it as a sacrificial lamb. 

The sacrificial lamb had to be perfect, without blemish. The swaddling cloths were used to protect the lamb against possible injury or blemish. No one but the utterly destitute would ever conceive of wrapping their newborn in cloths kept in the manger for the sacrificial lambs. To cloth your baby this way would represent a foreboding of his imminent death, a sign` that parents would utterly reject.

These were also special shepherds preparing special lambs for the Temple sacrifice. Therefore, it would have been these shepherds, above any others, who would have been particularly struck by the sight of a child, especially the Savior of Israel, wrapped in the garments of sacrifice.

While the angel disclosed the divine identity of this Newborn, he did not disclose where to find Him, other than in “the town of David” – Bethlehem. No address was given, but perhaps none was needed. The renowned Jewish Christian theologian, Alfred Edersheim suggests that they would have known the address:

• That the Messiah was to be born in Bethlehem, was a settled conviction [among the Jews – see Micah 5:2]. Equally so was the belief, that He was to be revealed from Migdal Eder, the “tower of the flock.” [Targum Pseudo-Jon. On Gen. xxxv. 21 – see also the prophecy of Micah 4:8] This Migdal Eder was not the watchtower for the ordinary flocks which pastured on the barren sheepground beyond Bethlehem, but lay close to the town, on the road to Jerusalem [perhaps four miles away]. A passage in the Mishnah [Shek. vii. 4] leads to the conclusion, that the flocks, which pastured there, were destined for Temple-sacrifices, and, accordingly, that the shepherds, who watched over them, were not ordinary shepherds.

It has been said that this lookout “tower of the flock” also housed the shepherds’ sheepfold for the sacrificial lambs in the bottom floor. Because these lambs were so valued, the sheepfold was kept especially clean. Perhaps because of this, the uninvited couple from Nazareth sought refuge in this stable, knowing that, meanwhile, the shepherds were residing in the “field” with their flocks.

In any event, the shepherds didn’t ask the angel for traveling instructions. They knew the prophecy from Micah 4:8 ["And you, O tower of the flock, hill of the daughter of Zion, to you shall it come,   the former dominion shall come, kingship for the daughter of Jerusalem."] and exactly where to go and “hurried off” to the sheepfold (Luke 2:16). Afterwards, they spread the Good News abroad:

• When they had seen him, they spread the word concerning what had been told them about this child. (Luke 2:17).

What was so special about this “word” and the confirmation they found in this Newborn? The heavenly host of angels had proclaimed that the advent of this Child meant the long-awaited peace and reconciliation between God and humanity:

• “Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests.” (Luke 2:14)

Those shepherds who really understood the Law knew that there had been no real and enduring peace between Israel and her God. The Temple signified the fact that Israel could not enter the presence of God; nor did they have the courage or desire to do so. The endless sacrifices signified that they were never truly freed from their sins (Hebrews 9 -10). If they were truly God-fearers, they were humbled and grieved by their sins. Mourning clung to them as a ball and chain, relieved by one thought only – the promised advent of a Messiah who would utterly take away their sins and grant them peace!

It is the fulfillment of this incredible promise – the Messiah died for my sins – that sustains me. It is only this that gives me the courage to face my ugly sins and to laugh in their face.

The more I have come to know my Messiah and my own unworthiness, the more I adore and esteem Him. Oddly, the more my own self-esteem dies, the more my esteem of this Child who came to die, lives. In my poorness of spirit, I have been blessed, and in my mourning, I have found His liberation.

Atheists, Billboards and “Hate Speech”

The American Atheists (AA) just erected billboard in Times Square reading, “Who needs Christ during Christmas?” with an “X” through “Christ.” While I defend their right to be offensive, I can still take issue with their message.

Even though the West is quickly abandoning their former secular roots and the freedom of speech in favor of repressing what is now deemed “hate speech,” we are on a dangerous trajectory, granting government additional power to suppress speech deemed “offensive.”

Nevertheless, I think that the AA message is needlessly offensive and even hypocritical. It is needlessly offensive because it offends without providing any off-setting content. It represents nothing more than mindless sloganeering. It contributes no substance, edification, inspiration, or illumination, just crass intolerance towards the Christian faith. It offers nothing but offense!

It is also offensive because of what it represents – an attempt to eliminate Christianity! I have dialogued with many militant atheists, and they have made no secret of the fact that they think that the world will be a better place without Christianity, and for this they labor! It is worthy of note that they are little different from their infamous forebears:

• Karl Marx: "In simple truth, I harbour hate 'gainst all the Gods."

• Nikolai Lenin: "Every religious idea, every idea of god, even every flirtation with the idea of God, is unutterable vileness."

• Nikita Khrushchev: "We, Communists ... are atheists ... Public education, the dissemination of scientific knowledge, and the study of the laws of nature, leave no place for belief in God ... We consider that belief in God contradicts our Communist outlook." "We remain the atheists that we have always been; we are doing all we can to liberate those people who are still under the spell of this religious opiate."

These atheistic luminaries were not content to merely speak against the Christian faith. They strenuously  sought to eliminate it along with those who practiced it. Do we have cause to be offended by this modern crop of militant atheists? Without a doubt!

In addition to the offense, the AA billboard also represents hypocrisy. Their website announces their purpose:

• American Atheists, Inc., is organized

·         to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry concerning religious beliefs, creeds, dogmas, tenets, rituals, and practices;

·         to encourage the development and public acceptance of a humane ethical system stressing the mutual sympathy, understanding, and interdependence of all people and the corresponding responsibility of each individual in relation to society;

Although the AAs claim that their purpose is “to stimulate and promote freedom of thought and inquiry,” their billboard is designed to accomplish the very opposite thing - to silence and discredit any real thought or discussion. This parallels my own experience with the militants. I have challenged them to public debates on numerous occasions, but they have always declined.

They also claim that they want “to encourage the development and public acceptance of a humane ethical system stressing the mutual sympathy, understanding, and interdependence of all people.” However, instead of fostering “mutual sympathy,” their billboard fosters blatant intolerance and an utter lack of “sympathy.” Instead of wanting to work along with us to improve society, the AA clearly wants to eliminate us. What else could “Christ” with an “X” through Him connote!

Meanwhile, the militants have hypocritically accused me of intolerance, when I have simply referenced surveys and studies that have demonstrated the ill effects of the gay lifestyle. They have labeled my “homophobe,” “bigot,” “hate-monger” and even “sexist” – nothing to promote their goal of “freedom of thought and inquiry.”

The AA’s claim that they are trying to work for a “humane ethical system,” while they are exhibiting the height of “Christophobia!” While they bash us for our alleged intolerance, they model the very behavior they claim to reject! However, they are known by the fruits that they bear.

Laughing in the midst of the War on Christmas and Christianity

 

My wife and I just returned from an eye-opening trip to Washington DC, which has the most incredible and extensive selection of museums in the world.

However, our visit wasn’t as inspiring as we might have wished, even though it was the Christmas season. We did see a broad array of Christmas trees but no public crèche scenes apart from two movable displays set up by private individuals for only the day. We did find a hotel near the White House hosting Christmas carols. However, the lyrics sang of no more than gifts, smiles, snow, and sledding.

What we found at the Kennedy Music Center was little different. We heard the Handel’s magnificent Hallelujah Chorus from his Messiah. However, it too had been sanitized of any reference to the Messiah and spoke only of “jiggle bells” and other associated secular superficialities. It felt as if I had loaned out my family photos to have them returned with my family’s faces replaced by those I no longer recognized – a major violation.

The next day, we toured the Capital. We learned a lot about statues, ornaments, and building blocks but nothing about the Christian building blocks upon which our nation was constructed.

However, the absence of any references to Christianity was richly compensated in the American Indian and Holocaust Museums. In these museums, there seemed to be little hesitation to reference the impact of Christianity. Predictably, its impact was largely associated with the negative. The Indian tour guide spoke of the repressive influence of Christianity upon Native American spirituality. However, he did concede that 60% of Native Americans identify with a church. Evidently, most haven’t regarded the Christian faith in an entirely negative way!

Although the Holocaust Museum did admit that Christians had rescued Jews, I can only remember one Christian group that had been identified as “Christian” – the Huguenot (Protestant) town of Le Chambon which had rescued thousands of Jews during the Holocaust.

On the last day, we visited the Natural History Museum, a museum which is openly committed to providing only natural explanations for the origins of planets, stars, life and even the entire cosmos. If these were the only possible or reasonable explanations, I would not take issue with their commitment. However, the museum makes absolutely no attempt to weigh natural explanations against intelligently designed causation.

Its presentation on African slavery associates this institution with Christian slave-traders without a hint that Muslims were – and still are – active in this inhumane trade. Instead, the curators gave high praise to the Muslim slaves who had temporarily rebelled against their so-called "Christian" masters in Brazil.

The Washington experience was a subtle indictment of our faith – a faith upon which Western civilization has traditionally rested. However, this experience was only a condensed version of the experience of an increasingly secular West.

While at the founding of this nation, secularism guaranteed everyone a seat at the table to express their own views and values, it has done a 180 degree turn. Now the table is only reserved for those who will play by the new set of secular norms. It replaces God with the new god of naturalistic and materialistic explanations. The secular altar is constructed on moral relativism which will not countenance any criticism of alternative sexual lifestyles. And upon this altar, Christian college groups have been banned from an increasing number of campuses, Christians have lost their jobs and businesses, and free speech has been curtailed.

We returned to our youth hostel, heads hung low. Secularism’s shadow has temporarily darkened Western society. It is no longer acceptable to be transparent about what is most central to us – our faith in Christ.

We even found this to be somewhat true in our international hostel. Two German young men told me that they were planning to teach science. I therefore asked them about what possible role God might have in their understanding of the physical world. Predictably, they gave me the well-rehearsed yet superficially respectful secular answer:

• Science has nothing to do with questions about God.

I must admit that I was infuriated by their answer but tried to hide it. All creation points inescapably back to the Creator (Romans 1:18-21), and I wanted to show them this, even though it should have already been apparent to them. However, secularism has provided some pat but mindless answers to avoid thinking about the God question. I therefore pushed ahead:

• Where do our changeless, elegant and uniform laws of science come from and how are they maintained in our expanding, always changing universe?

After an awkward moment, they confessed that no one could explain this.  Although tact would advise me to not pursue this matter any further, tact can also be short-sighted, so I pushed further:

• But doesn’t it make more sense that an Intelligent Being must transcend this universe and design and maintain it? Otherwise, we are left with the conclusion that the universe created and maintains itself.

The two Germans studiously avoided me after this. In their eyes, I was an extremist trying to push my religious opinions on them. They had already been inoculated against Christian truth claims by the museums, the media and the universities, convinced that such knowledge is not possible. They know that we can’t know. To them, we are wrong even though they can’t articulate how we are wrong.

But had I done something wrong? Had I needlessly alienated them? Fortunately, there were many Asian students and travelers at this hostel. Although they had bit deeply into the apple of material consumption, they had not as yet consumed the fruit of philosophical materialism and naturalism. They hadn’t been indoctrinated into an unexamined faith in moral relativism and religious pluralism. Nor had they been inoculated against Christianity, despite their years under communism. They retained a healthy curiosity and were willing to dialogue in a non-defensive manner. How refreshing!

I don’t want to be combative or offensive. I don’t want to dishonor my Savior, but I know that I have often crossed the line. My nephew just sent me links to videos in which he played a malevalent but comical blood-thirsty Santa Claus. They were amusing and didn’t malign my faith in the slightest, although they poked fun at Santa. In fact, if Santa Claus permanently dropped into the sea along with every Christmas tree, I would probably rejoice. As with many other Christians, I want Christmas, along with every other aspect of my life, to reflect Christ, my Savior.

However, these videos are part of a larger context, in which Jesus and anything to do with Christianity is maligned. It’s fair game. Hunting Christianity is always in season. It’s a good way to find acceptance within educated, elite circles.

I’m not against joking about my faith, myself or even other Christians. However, there comes a point where jokes reach a critical mass and they become ridicule, and ridicule then becomes dismissive and oppressive, preparing the way for outright oppression. Hitler would not have succeeded in his genocidal program hadn’t the way first been paved by the systematic ridicule and indictment of the Jewish people. (Muslims are now re-circulating gross Nazi cartoons depicting Jews in the most derogatory ways.)

I want to laugh with my nephew at his satire, but I cannot. I want to affirm him – and there is a lot to affirm, since he is quite talented. However, I cannot separate his skits from the fact that 170,000 Christians are being exterminated yearly, according to the estimate of Christianity Today. Nor can I separate this horror from the fact that our Western media refuses to report on this fact and Western governments refuse to do anything about it.

Likewise, I cannot laugh about Hitler’s Holocaust, even today. Western media and its willful silence prevent me from laughing. The vast majority of our media outlets give only the barest details about the alarming rise of Muslim-based anti-Semitism in the West. While anti-Semitic acts are escalating in our nation, they have already reached epidemic proportions in many western European countries – so much so that many Jews are fleeing.

I would like to affirm my nephew, but I would also like to suggest that he might aim his sights on other targets, those more worthy of derision and exposure – especially secularism. However, he might have drunk too deeply from its fountain to see it clearly enough to expose it.

Besides, humor rises to its greatest heights when it takes the form of self-criticism. However, this is harder to achieve. It means that we have to see ourselves and our own culture, which has molded and indoctrinated us - the culture which has made us who we are. This is something for which few have either the vision or the stomach. It will also exact a price. The culture we criticize will become our enemy. A true prophet is never honored in his own household or land.

Humor has an easier task when it tears apart the other guy. However, such humor is not prophetic; it fails to illuminate and it is often fails to rise above an act of hostility. When it focuses on the safe and convenient target, it merely reinforces social norms and biases.

Today, Christianity is that target. Nevertheless, I can laugh. Jesus has given us reason to laugh:

• "I have told you these things [of sorrow], so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world." (John 16:33)

Perhaps I can have a hearty laugh with my nephew!

The Magi and Balaam: A Tale of Two Kinds of Wisdom

What did the Magi understand? Why did they travel such a long distance from the east to come to worship the newborn King (Matthew 2:1-12)? Certainly, there were enough kings in the east who would have rewarded the Magi for their gifts and worship. The tiny child could not reciprocate in this manner.

Evidently, they knew that this child wasn’t an ordinary king but the King of Kings. But He was a foreigner! Why take the risk to worship someone who was not their own king. Certainly, this would arouse suspicions of sedition! However, the Magi knew that Jesus was more than just another great king. For one thing, He had His own personal star, which had appeared to them. For another, the Magi evidently knew enough to seek this child in the environs of Jerusalem, the city of Promise. They also knew that He was the Messiah and deserved worship. We see this in King Herod’s response to them (Mat. 2:7, 8).

Well, from where did the Magi get this wisdom? Frankly, we don’t know. However, there are certain parallels between their knowledge and that of another man from the east – the false prophet Balaam. Balaam also saw a star as he prophesied according to “the vision of the almighty”:

• "I see Him, but not now; I behold Him, but not near; A Star shall come out of Jacob; a Scepter shall rise out of Israel…” (Numbers 24:17; All quotations from the NKJV)

 The “scepter” represents the reign of a King. The “star” represents the light and the glory that emanate from Him. Although Balaam confessed that he saw Him, it was only from far off. In one sense, the King was already among Israel, but in another sense, His time had not yet come. However, the Magi understood otherwise. “His star” (Mat. 2:2) had finally appeared to them, heralding His arrival, and they knew that they had to make haste to worship Him.

Instead, Balaam had come to curse Israel at the bequest of the king of Moab, Balak, who feared the Israelite multitudes. However, the Lord had warned Balaam that he must only say what the Lord had instructed him to say.

Balak prepared sacrificial offerings and Balaam proceeded up the mountain to curse Israel, if God would so allow him. However, Balaam came back with a prophecy that great displeased his benefactor:

• "Who can count the dust of Jacob, or number one-fourth of Israel? Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my end be like his!" (Numbers 23:10)

Instead of cursing Israel as Balak would pay him to do, Balaam saw Israel’s blessed end, and expressed his desire to share in their fate.

As a faithful pagan who believed that getting blessings and curses was just a matter of using the right techniques or manipulations, he angrily brought his prophet up to another mountain and made additional sacrifices, convinced that the right combination would produce his desired outcome. However, Balaam’s next prophecy was even more discomforting to Balak:

• "He has not observed iniquity in Jacob, nor has He seen wickedness in Israel. The Lord his God is with him, and the shout of a King is among them.” (Numbers 23:21)

Strangely, even though Israel’s King was far off, He also was present with Israel. The Apostle Paul had written:

• All [Israel] drank the same spiritual drink. For they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ. (1 Cor. 10:4)

Christ was always among His people, but not in His post-crucifixion fullness. Israel was blessed through Christ’s presence materially and otherwise. Through the anticipated blood of Christ, "He has not observed iniquity in Jacob, nor has He seen wickedness in Israel.”

This is absolutely incredible. Israel was crawling with “iniquity” and “wickedness.” Why did not God see this? Was He blind? Certainly not! Instead, He perceived sinful Israel through eyes of love and mercy – a mercy that can only be understood in light of the time when His requirement of justice would be decisively fulfilled on the Cross.

King Balak was not lacking in perseverance or sacrificial animals. He took his prophet to another mountain. This time, Balaam described his prophecy as to one whose “eye is opened” and sees the “vision of the Almighty” (Num. 24:3, 4). “Falling down” in awe, he saw something incredible, something that we are prevented from seeing:

• "How lovely are your tents, O Jacob! Your dwellings, O Israel!” (Numbers 24:5)

After 40 years of wandering in the desert, Israel’s tents must have looked ratty at best. However, this wasn’t how they looked in their God’s eyes. Instead, they were “lovely.” Everything about Israel was beloved, even their smelly, un-bathed tents!

Although our God loves us with a love that surpasses all understanding (Eph. 3.17-19), we are kept from seeing this. This causes us to walk by faith and not by sight (2 Cor. 5:7). I suspect that we are not yet ready to receive the fullness of this knowledge.

By the time that the Magi arrived to worship the Child Jesus, He was no longer living in a stable but a house. However, it must have represented the humblest of lodgings. Nevertheless, these travelers fell to the ground and worshiped. There is no hint here of an elegant bow or curtsy. As Balaam had hit the ground, so too did the Magi, overcome with His glory. However, what Balaam had seen from afar, the Magi saw in person.

Balaam had seen the King as only the Savior of Israel. However, the Magi worshiped Jesus, the King of Kings, the Savior of the entire world and also their Savior. While Balaam had received the gifts of the King of Moab, the Magi gave gifts to the King of Kings.

Although Balaam wouldn’t curse Israel, he foolishly counseled Balak to tempt Israel to sin, which Israel did at great cost to themselves. However, Balaam was killed when Israel retaliated against Moab for their treachery. In contrast, the Magi left their gifts, and not evil advice, and lived, warned by God to avoid the murderous Herod.

Balaam had also seen the light, but this didn’t bring him to worship. It had no lasting effect upon him. However, the Magi worshiped and departed after leaving their precious gifts of gold, incense and myrrh.

It had been a divine appointment. Once they left, the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream directing them to flee to Egypt. This they were able to do in comfort, thanks to the gifts of the Magi.

I suspect that Balaam’s treacherous advice finally earned Balak’s reward. However, his was a fool’s wisdom – a wisdom that failed to perceive the “tents of Israel” and the King who inhabited them.

Media’s Offensive War on Christmas and Christianity

There has been a lot of talk about the “war on Christmas.” There is only part of what seems to be a war on all positive expressions of the Christian faith. I just received this mass-email last night, and I tend to believe it:

• On the Today Show, Matt Lauer interviewed the wife of one of the Navy Seals killed in Benghazi.

• He asked her what she would say to her children about their dad and how she would want them to remember him.  She said, and I quote, "His love for Christ," and then continued with a few other things.

• Throughout the day and on MSN homepage, when the story is replayed they have edited the "His love for Christ" part out. Why? Because using the word Christ might offend someone.

• Well, I am a Christian and I am offended! Offended that they would edit it out. Offended that we as Christians are asked to tread lightly so as not to offend someone of another religion.

• I think anyone who missed the original broadcast this morning should know what NBC has done.  This man loved his country and loved his God and gave his life for both, just as Christ gave His life for him.

Although the media has been very free to report on the negative aspects of Christianity, it shows sublime restraint when it comes to anything that might cast Christianity in a positive light. How do they justify this? They sometimes justify their bias by claiming that they do not want to give offense.

This is hypocritical to the max. They have shown little regard about offending people like the above commentator. In other words, they are very selective about whom they are willing to offend. And they have been applying this double-standard for quite a while with almost no one to call them to account.

This is serious! The media is supposed to function as the watchdog to point the light upon injustice. However, who will point the light on the media when they systematically apply their double-standards!

As some in the media have confessed, they are more interested in social activism – promoting their own cause – than in truth. Without the vital role of media to provide accountability, “news” becomes propaganda and “knowledge” becomes a euphemism for politically correct indoctrination. Consequently, those who stand on the “right” side of political correctness can proceed with their devious plans without worry that the light will shine on them.