Is Cozbi in the House?

Brian D. Dykstra, teacher at Hope PR Christian School in Walker, MI

“And the name of the Midianitish woman that was slain was Cozbi, the daughter of Zur; he was head over a people, and of a chief house in Midian” (Num. 25:15).

The Israelites were camped just east of the Jordan River. The fulfilment of God’s promise to give Abraham’s children the Promised Land was near. The anticipation and excitement of the people were palpable. Israel defeated the Amorites, possessing their land and living in their cities. Better things were yet to come!

Israel was now in Shittim. Since the people did not complain about a lack of food or water, which they did not hesitate to do, we can assume Israel was supplied with both. As there was no struggle to obtain the basic necessities of life, perhaps there was some leisure time to explore the offerings of the world around them. Numbers 25:1 tells us, “the people began to commit whoredom with the daughters of Moab.”

Israel was the peculiar treasure of God. From the descendants of Terah, Jehovah established His covenant with Abraham, not Lot and his son Moab. God then distinguished among the offspring of Abraham, decreeing that the covenant seed would be called in Sarah’s son Isaac, not Hagar’s son Ishmael or Keturah’s son Midian.

God gave Israel His commandments and the laws which governed His people’s social and religious life. God was not to be worshipped the same way the heathen worshipped their idols. The nations around Israel were supposed to be able to tell that God’s people were a separate and distinct nation.

Moab heard what God had done to Egypt. Moab knew of Israel’s recent destruction of the Amorites. Though the Israelites were the descendants of slaves and had spent nearly forty years as nomads in the wilderness, it was clear Israel was a serious threat. Moab had enmity for God’s covenant people. Moab, though witnessing the blessings of Jehovah resting upon Israel, did not repent, put away her idols and ask to participate in some way in Israel’s covenant life. Moab would repeatedly oppose Israel through the rest of her history.

The Midianites joined Moab in hostility against God’s people. The Midianites were also distant relatives of Israel. The Midianites were nomads, not having any fixed territory of their own. From time to time, they lived near Moab. Now these nations had a common interest in opposing Israel. Did Midian bear a grudge against Israel? Was the record of Genesis 25:5-6 told from father to son? “And Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac. But unto the sons of the concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son, while he yet lived, eastward, unto the east country.” Can you hear the Midianites complain, “What! You mean our forefather wasn’t even deemed worthy to be in the same area as Abraham’s precious Isaac but was sent away!”

Moab’s king, Balak, knew something must be done to stop Israel. Balak had enough sense not to fight Israel on the battlefield, so he sent for the prophet Balaam. What made Israel so fearsome was that Israel was blessed by Jehovah. All that needed to be done, therefore, was to have Jehovah’s curse placed upon Israel. Israel would then be no different from any other nation and Balak could take his chances against them in war. Balaam found he could not curse those whom God had blessed. Balaam pronounced God’s blessing upon Israel, spoke of Israel’s coming glory and the destruction of Israel’s enemies.

Balaam, however, was not finished yet. God’s church could not be destroyed by pronouncing God’s curse to be upon them but what could be done was to corrupt God’s church so that the church could no longer be distinguished from the world. The Israelites could be enticed into idolatry by encouraging relationships with Moab’s women. The women of Midian were willing to join in this effort. The Zondervan Bible Encyclopedia has this in its entry regarding Balaam, “His teaching involved the most contemptible action ever conceived in an unregenerate heart. Corrupt a people you cannot curse and God will have to chasten them. In short, this means to take a people under divine blessing and deliberately lead them into sin to strip them of the divine blessing.”

It worked. God punished Israel with a plague and twenty-four thousand people died. Those who feared God were weeping before the door of the tabernacle. Did they feel too corrupt to enter to bring their supplication to God? While these people wept, Zimri, a son of one the important families of Simeon, brazenly took a Midianite woman to his tent. No imagination was required to determine what Zimri had in mind.

The Midianite woman was Cozbi. She was not a daughter of some low-level goat herder. She was the daughter of a man who was the leader of an important house in Midian. She was a princess. In our day, Zimri, one of the elite in Simeon, and Princess Cozbi would be among the trend setters, those pursued by the paparazzi.

Phinehas the priest followed them into the privacy of Zimri’s tent and killed them both with a javelin. The plague was stayed and the Lord’s anger was turned. God rewarded Phinehas for being zealous and God told Moses to fight Midian so this could not happen again.

Satan continues his attempts to corrupt God’s people. It has worked before. Satan has had success in the areas of heresy, doctrinal indifference and false ecumenism. The boundary between what calls itself the church and the world is continually blurred.

Yet I am convinced an area in which Satan enjoys great success is in the various dramatic presentations of Hollywood. Satan would have us grow accustomed to the vilest of sins by having them presented so often that we hardly even notice. We know we are to be distinct as God’s people but being different from the world does not come easily to our nature. Hollywood is a great teacher when it comes to setting examples about how to act, talk, dress and what to value in life. Not watching the productions of Hollywood can make us appear to be as outdated as zipperless clothes and the Amish buggy, beard and wimple. Who wants to be as weird as that?

How much of Hollywood’s drama enters the privacy of our homes through television, cable services, videos and DVDs? Are these corruptions made pure by taking them into the privacy of covenant homes? Is it nobody else’s business? Is there no adverse effect on Christ’s people?

Zimri thought he could do as he pleased in the privacy of his tent. Nobody else should care. Zimri thought, “I will have my sinful pleasure in my tent, and the rest of you prudes can go right ahead and weep in front of the tabernacle as much as you please.” Phinehas thought differently. Zimri’s action did have an effect on the covenant community at large. Are we corrupting ourselves with worldly entertainment? The actresses of Hollywood are as so many Cozbis to instruct us and our children in the ways of the world. Is Cozbi in the house?

The Voice of the Enemy (2)

Brian D. Dykstra, teacher at Hope PR Christian School in Walker, MI

“Forget not the voice of thine enemies: the tumult of those that rise up against thee increaseth continually” (Psalm 74:23).

[In the previous article we looked at an article by Mr. Gregory Paul, which concluded that belief in God is bad. Society is better off when there are fewer people who believe in God.]

The paper then concludes with several pages of e-mails sent in by listeners.

Diamond Sutherland (USA): “I completely agree that we have the most dysfunctional society. Anyone who needs to believe there is something more than them [sic] has no control over their own lives. We should be beyond believing in Gods by now. Gods were created because the early humans had no control over what was going on around them. We have control. Yet for some reason the Christian right believes we do not. Someone please throw a science book at these people.”

Jan Velema (Canada): “The reason that religion, especially Christianity, is bad for society is because most Christians believe that people come back from the dead. This is absurd! The ancient Norse and Greeks believed their Gods were real as well. To continue to teach your children impossibilities displays a lack of intellect. There must be an admittance of these mistaken past teachings in order for Christianity to survive. If not, it will continue to die a slow, painful death.”

Cliff Prosser (USA): “ But religion isn’t the issue ... faith is the issue. The Bible itself is replete with examples of religiosity that has no real substance. For example, the Pharisees of old who held great religious stature but gained no favour with God because they were self absorbed, intellectual and arrogant. Religion is not the answer. A true, deep, abiding belief and faith in a sovereign God and the blood of the Perfect Sacrificial Lamb (Jesus Christ) that He provided is the answer.”

Neil (USA): “Fact: Here in America we eat more ice cream in July than any other month. Fact: Here in America there are more rapes committed in July than any other month. Conclusion: Eating ice cream causes rape. This is the kind of shoddy statistical analysis your report depends on.”

Thomas Anderson (Canada): “Religion is the world’s most deadly weapon of mass destruction.”

Gern Blansden (USA): “Yes, religion is bad for society. Faith in each other is not. But the way modern religious leaders have warped and skewed faith in each other to become a basis for persecution and discrimination has turned religion into more of a liability for society than an asset. There is nothing religion provides to society that cannot be achieved through faith in each other and an extension of one’s own benevolence to others. Throw away the guilt, rules and controls of religion and instill faith and hope in each other and you turn around the state of this world. Open your minds. This world, our society, is not a mythological entity.”

We can hear the voice of God’s enemies, the spirit of anti-Christ, in this discussion. Mr. Paul believes he has proven, scientifically, that God is more of a nuisance than a help. Society would benefit if there weren’t so many of His followers around. We can only expect such an attitude to increase and become more vocal. Despite society’s praise of open-mindedness and tolerance, for how long will society tolerate those who would truly worship God or be open-minded toward those who hold God’s Word as Truth?

There is the assertion that God was only needed to explain the origin of the universe. Man no longer needs the creative power of God. However, is there no need for God’s recreative power in redemption? It appears mankind sees no sin from which he needs to be delivered. The Russian author Dostoyevsky was correct, apparently, when we wrote, “If God does not exist, then everything is permissible.” It’s becoming evident that not only are all things permissible, but nothing is sin either. No wonder anti-Christ has no need, and little tolerance remaining, for God.

Are we concerned about the perilous days which lay ahead for us and our covenant children? What will the voices of the enemy be saying soon, and what tumults will be raised against God’s Anointed One? God will not forget the enemies’ voice but His is the stronger voice. By the clear, unmistakable voice of His Word, God will gather, defend and finally raise from the grave all those who look to the Lord Jesus Christ in faith.

The Voice of the Enemy (1)

Brian D. Dykstra, teacher at Hope PRCS, Walker, MI

“Forget not the voice of thine enemies: the tumult of those that rise up against thee increaseth continually” (Psalm 74:23).

The wars, possibilities of future conflicts, hurricanes and earthquakes of which we have read in the news bear testimony that Christ is returning. It is not as often, however, that we can read of the growth of man’s arrogance in his way of sin and his disdain for anything having to do with God and His Word. Yet, the voice of God’s enemies is increasing continually.

The Journal of Religion and Society recently published a study done by Gregory S. Paul. Mr. Paul is known as a leading international expert on dinosaur paleontology, but he turned his research abilities to the area of social science for a recent study. Mr. Paul investigated the belief that religion is of benefit to society. He writes,

As he helped initiate the American experiment Benjamin Franklin stated that “religion will be a powerful regulator of our actions, give us peace and tranquility within our minds, and render us benevolent, useful and beneficial to others.” When the theory of biological evolution removed the need for a supernatural creator concerns immediately arose over the societal implications of widespread abandonment of faith. In 1880 the religious moralist Dostoyevsky penned the famous warning that “if God does not exist, then everything is permissible.”

Mr. Paul’s study intends to investigate the relationship between society’s overall level of belief in a supernatural power and problems in society. By employing scientific research methods Mr. Paul comes to the conclusion that higher rates of belief correspond with higher levels of social problems while nations in which levels of belief are the lowest, are the nations which demonstrate the highest levels of societal health. Mr. Paul claims that this would not be true if believing in God were beneficial to society. He concludes,

If the data showed that the U.S. enjoyed higher rates of societal health than the more secular, pro-evolution democracies, then the opinion that popular belief in a creator is strongly beneficial to national cultures would be supported. Although they are by no means utopias, the populations of secular democracies are clearly able to govern themselves and maintain societal cohesion. Indeed, the data examined in this study demonstrates that only the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have, for the first time in history, come closest to achieving practical “cultures of life” that feature low rates of lethal crime, juvenile-adult mortality, sex related dysfunction, and even abortion. The least theistic secular developed democracies such as Japan, France, and Scandinavia have been most successful in these regards.

That is Mr. Paul’s conclusion. Belief in God is bad. Society is better off when there are fewer people who believe in God.

Mr. Paul’s study caught the attention of Andy Clark, host of “Amsterdam Forum,” an hour long shortwave radio program broadcasted by Radio Netherlands Worldwide. The printable on-line version of this broadcast begins:

Is having God on your side always advantageous? Well, a new study from the US says not necessarily so. The broad ranging study compares data from 18 developed democracies and it shows societies with higher levels of belief also have higher levels of societal dysfunction. The US was the most religious country in the study, with around 90 percent of people believing in a higher power, and it also showed the highest murder rates, highest levels of child mortality and highest levels of sexually transmitted disease and teenage pregnancy. An expert panel joined Amsterdam Forum this week to tackle the question: “Is religion bad for society?”

The panelists included Gregory Paul, and Peter Derkx, professor of Humanism and Worldview at the University for Humanistics in Utrecht. The paper includes a few key quotations from the discussion:

Peter Derkx: “I don’t think religion in itself is the problem. I think a particular type of religion is the problem and I would say an absolute belief in God is closer to what I think is a problem. I think that God as an authority figure causes people not to think for themselves critically and rationally and intelligently, and I think it’s very important when people meet problems in life that they think about what they want and what the best thing to do is, etcetera, instead of looking to some authority figure who tells the[m] what to do.”

Gregory Paul: “The Bible is whatever you want to make it, there are passages where God orders his followers to kill children, to mass murder children—this happens repeatedly. We need to start looking at whether the Bible is really a good moral guide. It’s a very dark book, in many ways, written by ancient tribal peoples, who in many regards didn’t know any better. This may be one of the reasons why the United States, which is more Bible-based than any other developed democracy, is suffering from some [sic] many societal problems.”

Living in a Visual Society (3)

Brian D. Dykstra, teacher at Hope PR Christian School in Walker, MI.

This is the third instalment of this series of Highlights articles about the effects of “screen time” on our children. I began with a glance at the beginning of sin. Satan often tempts us through our eyes, while God uses our ears through the preaching of the Word. We also wondered what is happening to our children’s ability to listen attentively for prolonged periods of time to sermons, when our visual age allows us to divert our attention quickly and search out other options when we begin to be bored.

Last time, I noted that physical therapists have actually began to see an increase in young patients whose upper spines have developed problems because of bad posture brought about by hours of observing screens. I also related what I had read about children’s ability to develop “emotional intelligence,” the ability to read other’s body language and facial expressions when much of today’s communication takes place through social media.

Having looked at several research papers, Katherine DeWeese’s thesis titled, “Screen Time, How Much is Too Much? The Social and Emotional Costs of Technology on the Adolescent Brain” serves our purposes well. (Her entire paper can be found at the Educational Research Information Center’s website. Enter ED546474 in the search box.)

Personal electronic devices with their portability and internet capabilities have made multitasking a way of life in society. The claim is that working on several projects at a time can increase worker productivity, especially in an office setting. However, adolescent multitasking has a different purpose. While doing school work, an adolescent is likely to remain connected to friends through social media. DeWeese reports that research shows academic performance declines when there are several social demands imposing on academic work.

DeWeese writes, “The brain can multitask but only by separating those tasks in the mind. The ability to do many things at once means the brain is splitting itself. If students engage in this each day for several hours, their brains will be forming neural pathways in a shortened capacity. It is similar to the difference between muscles used for sprinting and muscles used for long distance. Long and lean muscles need to be active for longer amounts of time and thus are used more. Tight and bulky muscles are used for speed, not endurance. We are training our brain for bursts of energy and not the contemplative long haul of life in a global world.”

She adds that, “technology, while enhancing the access to information, is stunting the ability to process information and think critically. Students are losing their ability to reflect, take time to think and ponder about questions to which they do not know the answer. The new generation’s solution is to immediately pick up the nearest device and ask Google. What is that teaching the students?”

Most educators are interested in providing their students with the skills needed to solve the world’s problems. In the view of many, society’s greatest threat is that humanity is soiling its own nest with its reliance on burning fossil fuels. We need new problem solvers in chemical, electrical and mechanical engineering in the interest of developing a green and sustainable economy and society.

We have more pressing concerns. Is there a doctrinal controversy in our denomination’s future? It has been quite some time since someone in a position of leadership has taken a hammer, even if the hammer had been used in a very subtle fashion, to our denominational foundation. Today’s students would not be able to “google” their way to a determination of truth or falsehood in those circumstances. They would have to be able to contemplate, and invest prolonged thought to analyze what would be said and written by those in opposing camps. We have witnessed what happens in following generations when the generation which experiences the controversy comes to the wrong conclusion about what the Bible teaches. We should not be so proud as to assume that we are immune to what we have seen develop elsewhere.

DeWeese then turns her research to a relative of multitasking, Continuous Partial Attention (CPA). This is a “situation in which the individual does not focus on any one thing in reality while he or she is engaged in and follows everything. While multitasking can be defined as doing many things at once in order to be more productive, CPA is constant fragmented attention that is motivated not by productivity, but by the desire to be connected.”

She goes on to relate a study done on digital natives, people who have grown up with technology. Researchers found “that the digital natives switch their attention between media platforms every other minute. Digital natives switch their attention at the first sign of boredom. The frequent switching results in low attention that limits their emotional response. This study strongly suggests a transformation ... that is rewiring the brains of a generation of Americans like never before ... Under this kind of stress, our brains instinctively signal the adrenal gland to secrete cortisol and adrenaline. In the short run, these stress hormones boost energy levels and augment memory, but over time they actually impair cognition, lead to depression, and alter the neural circuitry in the hippocampus, amygdala, and prefrontal cortex—the brain regions that control mood and thought. Chronic and prolonged techno-brain burnout can even reshape the underlying brain structure.”

It has been many years since I took human physiology and embryology in college, so my response to this aspect of DeWeese’s research must be limited. However, we are wonderfully fashioned works of the Creator’s hand. We have both spiritual and physical aspects to us. God formed Adam out of the dust of the ground (his physical aspect) while breathing into him the breath of life (his spiritual aspect). These two are tightly bound, intricately intertwined into one creative work. I do not know how one determines cause and effect when considering the relationship between physical and spiritual problems. However, could problems in brain development lead to spiritual issues? Is over-use of modern technology indicative of a lack of vigorous spiritual growth? Maybe these questions are worth some thought.

If the effects on brain development in adolescents cited by DeWeese are true, we had better be careful on how much “screen time” we allow our children to have. Parents must be attentive to their children, not letting them drift along in our actual, physical presence while they wile away hours in the unreality of the ether of social media and the internet. Young minds are growing and developing, and parents must engage in face to face conversation with their children to ensure they are developing a rich spiritual life, not a life in which quality is measured by “likes,” Facebook “friends” or the frequency of times a smartphone vibrates, but a life in which they show evidence of seeking first the kingdom of God and His righteousness.