Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s Middle East envoy, joined US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee on a visit to a US-backed aid operation in Gaza on Friday. The Israeli military said two hundred trucks of aid were distributed by the UN and other organizations on Thursday, with hundreds more waiting to be picked up from border crossings inside Gaza. Food is now being airdropped into Gaza by six countries, including for the first time France, Spain, and Germany.

By way of background: In March, after a cease-fire with Hamas fell apart, Israel stopped the entry of all goods and supplies into the Gaza Strip in a move aimed at pressuring the terror group to accept a new proposal to extend the ceasefire. Many in Israel also viewed the agency that had been aiding the Palestinians as complicit with Hamas and terrorism.

However, as the Wall Street Journal reports, “Photos of starving children have proved too much for most of Israel’s leaders to withstand.” As a result, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has “reportedly bypassed extremists in his cabinet to expand opportunities for the delivery of vital supplies.”

I must begin by stating the obvious: the suffering of even a single person grieves the heart of the God who made them. But there’s more to this tragic story in Gaza, a factor that is relevant to the way we see all conflicts and all peoples today.

 “Hamas Wants Gaza to Starve”

Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib is a native of Gaza and a political analyst. His recent article in the Atlantic is titled, “Hamas Wants Gaza to Starve.” He writes:

Despite the surge of hundreds of trucks into Gaza over the past four days, very few supplies have made it into warehouses to be distributed to the population. Aid shipments are being seized by a combination of desperate civilians, lawless gangs, clan-affiliated thugs, and merchants of death. Chaos and apocalyptic scenery are the norm, not the exception.

Alkhatib reports that he has spoken with “dozens of Gazans who are furious about what is unfolding around them. . . . But their anger is directed primarily at Hamas, which they hold responsible for putting the people of Gaza in this position, and for its continued refusal to end the war that it started.”

In his analysis,

Hamas actually wants a famine in Gaza. Producing mass death from hunger is the group’s final play, its last hope for ending the war in a way that advances its goals. Hamas has benefited from Israel’s decision to use food as a lever against the terror group because the catastrophic conditions for civilians have generated an international outcry, which is worsening Israel’s global standing and forcing it to reverse course.

Since its horrific October 7 invasion that started Gaza on this road to ruin, Hamas has refused to return all its hostages unless Israel withdraws its forces and allows the terrorist group to remain in power. This, of course, would only prepare the way for another Oct. 7. Now Hamas is using the starvation of its own people to leverage its power as a platform for continued attacks on the Jewish state.

Even the Arab world recognizes Hamas for the terrorists they are. Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt have called for the group to disband and give up power, joining fourteen other countries in signing a statement that condemned the Oct. 7 attacks.

Why Hitler wanted to eradicate the Jews

Over my many travels to Israel, I have met some Israelis who view a Palestinian state as an existential threat to the Jewish people. They fear that if the Palestinians have their own nation, some will use it as a platform from which to attack Israel. Some, therefore, support Jewish settlements in Gaza and the West Bank and view the subjugation of the Palestinian people as necessary for the security of Israel.

For example, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich want Israel to block all humanitarian aid into Gaza as long as Hamas holds Israeli hostages, whatever the consequences for the Palestinians there. They have called for the war to continue and seek the “voluntary” migration of Gaza’s population of two million Palestinians.

Hamas, by contrast, exists for the purpose of destroying Israel and the Jewish people. They are convinced that Jews are hostis humani generis, the enemies of humankind itself. Nor do they care for the people they are supposed to be serving, using Palestinian civilians as human shields and as pawns in their quest for power. The son of a founding Hamas leader said, “They don’t care for the Palestinian people. They do not regard human life.”

Viewing humans as a collective rather than as individuals is at the heart of this conflict.

For historical precedent, Wall Street Journal editorial writer Barton Swaim points to historian Thomas Weber, who notes that Hitler wanted to eradicate the Jews not because he thought individual Jews were evil. Rather, it was “because of their racial destiny or racial determination, which made it impossible for them to act in any other ways than parasitically.”

Why my father fought the Japanese

Reducing people to their race or the nation they occupy greatly simplifies geopolitics. We can then support or reject them as a collective without the hard work of understanding their individual needs, stories, and merits.

This is tragically necessary in war, of course. My father fought individual Japanese soldiers in World War II just as his father fought individual German soldiers in World War I, both as a means to defending America from Japan and Germany.

But whenever we can, however we can, we must resist the human tendency to devalue other humans by categorizing them as anything other than individuals made in the image of their Maker (Genesis 1:27). If you have children, you love each of them as if there were only one of them. Their Heavenly Father does the same.

So, please join me in praying for Palestinians who are suffering as a result of Hamas’s invasion of Israel and Israel’s response to it. Pray for the hostages still being held in horrific conditions by the terrorists. Pray for this tragic conflict to end in a way that protects both Palestinians and Israelis from future violence.

And pray for all Palestinians and all Israelis to meet the One who died for them and whose love will give them the peace their hearts seek most.

How a Satanist became a Christian

I once heard a former Satanist tell how he came to faith in Christ. He hated Christians with a passion, one in particular. But nothing he did could dissuade this believer from continuing to love him, pray for him, and seek to serve him.

At one point, the Satanist became so angry that he struck the Christian, knocking him to the ground. The believer touched his hand to his bleeding face, held it up to his persecutor, and said, “If you’re good enough for Jesus, you’re good enough for me.”

That’s the gospel. Who will hear—and see—it from you today?

Quote for the day:

“When you know how much God is in love with you, then you can only live your life radiating that love.” —Mother Teresa

Our latest website resources:

• The dangerous rise of sports gambling: A cultural crisis in the making
• How does a healthy shepherd model rest?
• Kamala Harris will not run for California governor
• Deion Sanders’ most recent struggle transcends football
• What do miracles, sinful lifestyles, and David’s heart for God teach us about faith in today’s world?

Denison Forum

Why climate change may save more lives than it costs

Lee Zeldin, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, announced earlier this week what he described as “the largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States.” The new ruling argues that Congress has not given the EPA the necessary authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, methane from oil and gas companies, or a host of other pollutants.

The shift stands in contrast to how the EPA has approached these issues since the Clean Air Act ostensibly established a legal basis for such regulation back in 2009. However, the basis for that law was the “endangerment finding,” which argued that greenhouse gases represent a sufficiently large threat to public health and welfare to necessitate government intervention. Zeldin and his team are questioning that conclusion.

Given the way government agencies typically function, it may seem odd for one to actively try to limit the scope of its authority. However, shortly after his nomination to lead the EPA, Zeldin stated that his goal was to drive “a dagger through the heart of climate-change religion” by going after the regulations used to support it.

And this is hardly the first time that conservatives—or even President Trump—have sought to chip away at these protocols. During his first term, Trump undid many of the regulations from Obama’s tenure in the Oval Office, only to see them reinstated by Biden. However, if the endangerment finding were overturned, then it would be far more difficult for future presidents to do the same.

But while Zeldin and others in the administration have argued the cost of these regulations outpaces the environmental gains, their primary focus is less on the science behind climate change and more on the argument that Congress took shortcuts in granting regulatory powers to the EPA in the first place. Largely avoiding the quagmire of debate around shifting temperatures and humanity’s impact is seen as an easier path to deregulation.

Whether that assessment proves accurate will be for the courts to decide, but the attempt has sparked fresh debate over both climate change in general and the government’s role in combating it more specifically. And when it comes to that debate, relying on facts over narratives is essential.

To that end, I found a recent article by Jonah Goldberg in The Dispatch to be particularly helpful.

Data-driven or agenda-driven?

In his article, Goldberg argues that—at least in the short to intermediate term—climate change may actually save more lives than it costs. He points to how, in Europe, for example, 8.3 times more people die from cold weather than from heat. If that fact is surprising, it may be because heat-related deaths get nine times more media coverage.

Goldberg is quick to clarify: “I think climate change is real and a problem—even if I think it is also overhyped and used to justify a political and economic agenda that is not entirely about dealing with the problem. So I don’t want to be too dismissive.”

However, he goes on to point out that these changes manifest more in the form of warmer winters than hotter summers, which could lead to greater crop yields, faster reforestation, and fewer cold-related deaths. Moreover, carbon emissions from heating are four times greater than the emissions from air conditioning, meaning that colder climates exacerbate the problem far more than warmer ones.

Yet, despite those factors, many continue to focus only on climate change’s potential consequences—many of which are both real and troubling—while ignoring the possible benefits. And this trend is seen most clearly in Europe, where the rising temperatures have proved particularly painful because the people there are often ill-equipped to handle them.

In Switzerland, for example, government approval is required to install air conditioning. In France, as of a few years ago, roughly three-quarters of all homes were unair-conditioned, and the prevailing narratives throughout their culture aim to keep it that way.

A recent Wall Street Journal article described how “In France, media outlets often warn that cooling a room to more than 15 degrees Fahrenheit below the outside temperature can cause something called ‘thermal shock,’ resulting in nausea, loss of consciousness and even respiratory arrest.”

As someone who has spent most of my life in Texas, I can assure you that is not the case.

But while it is easy to deride claims of “thermal shock” and an ever-evolving list of climate-related doomsday predictions—or their counterparts that claim nothing is actually changing—the truth is that all of us are tempted at times to downplay the truth when it proves inconvenient to the narrative we would prefer to believe.

And, as Christians, that is a mistake we cannot afford to make.

Itching ears and false teachers

One of the most tragic examples of this mistake in Scripture comes from the scribes and Pharisees who opposed Jesus throughout the Gospels. For the most part, these were well-meaning, well-educated, God-fearing men who dedicated their lives to helping people know how to be right with the Lord.

The problem was that their understanding of what made a person right with God was wrong. So when Jesus came preaching about the need for repentance and looking beyond right actions to focus on getting your heart right, they rejected him.

They built their lives, their ministries, and even their very identities around a false idea, and their dependence upon the lie was so strong that not even God incarnate could correct them.

But while the Pharisees are a famous example of this fault, all of us are prone to the same mistake. Moreover, it is just as damaging to our relationship with God and as easy to fall victim to today as it was two thousand years ago.

Our culture fits well into Paul’s warning that “the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths” (2 Timothy 4:3–4).

Fortunately, the advice that follows is just as relevant as well: “But as for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry” (2 Timothy 4:5). In short, choose what’s true no matter the cost and never waver from our calling to help others do the same.

So, what false narratives are you prone to believing today? Are there any areas of your life where your ears are itching for convenient myths over inconvenient truths?

All of us have our blind spots where we are vulnerable to that temptation. The key is knowing yours and then learning to rely on the Lord to help you choose his reality over one of your own making.

Will you ask for his help in making the right choice today?

Quote of the day:

“The word of God hidden in the heart is a stubborn voice to suppress.” —Billy Graham

Our latest website resources:

• Tariffs, Hulk Hogan, Deion, Forrest Frank & Happy Gilmore 2 thoughts | CB Ep. 30
• Kamala Harris will not run for California governor
• Deion Sanders’ most recent struggle transcends football
• The latest on the Russia earthquake and Pacific tsunamis
• What do miracles, sinful lifestyles, and David’s heart for God teach us about faith in today’s world?

Denison Forum

Five ethical issues and the path to courageous faith

According to the Cleveland Clinic, mitochondrial diseases are “a group of genetic conditions that affect how mitochondria in your cells produce energy.” They can cause developmental delays in children, profound muscle weakness, hearing loss, blindness, strokes, and heart failure. Those with the worst symptoms die earliest, often before the age of three.

Now there’s a way to prevent the transmission of these diseases to the next generation.

Researchers in the UK reported recently on the birth of eight babies, each of whom was conceived using one sperm and two eggs. They took the combination of the mother and father’s DNA from a fertilized egg with sick mitochondria and inserted it into a surrogate egg with healthy mitochondria stripped of its own DNA. (Think of extracting the yoke from a chicken egg and inserting it into an egg whose yoke had been removed.)

The children produced in this way will avoid the mitochondrial diseases they would otherwise have inherited. What’s not to like about this news?

A good deal, as it turns out.

Five ethical issues

I serve as resident scholar for ethics with one of the largest not-for-profit healthcare systems in the country. In the healthcare context, I understand the appeal of this procedure. If we could remove malignant tumors, why not remove diseased mitochondria to produce healthy babies?

However, I see at least five issues with three-parent embryos.

First, the mitochondria from the surrogate eggs transmitted their own DNA to the children. While only 1 percent of the total, this DNA can influence brain development and affect everything from lifespan and height to kidney and liver function, blood counts, and the development of diabetes or multiple sclerosis.

And this means that the children have three genetic parents. What are the ethical implications here?

Second, we should consider the IVF procedures utilized. A large number of embryos are typically created in the lab and tested for viability; those that are not used are frozen or discarded. If you believe life begins at conception, as I do, then you see these unused embryos as human lives and their demise as a form of abortion.

Third, what are the future consequences of babies created from three parents? They will transmit their genetics to their offspring. Is the human race being altered?

Fourth, will this technique lead to customized children? Will the DNA of persons of unusual capacities (intellectual, athletic, etc.) be sought for inclusion in the future? Will this be a form of eugenics?

Fifth, will three-parent babies become the norm for lesbian couples? Using donor sperm, the DNA of one partner could be combined with the mitochondria of the other so that both are the genetic “parents” of their children.

“I don’t believe in heaven and hell”

Three-parent embryos are intended to prevent disease and death caused by genetically inherited diseases. They are an example of the fact that many people today will do nearly anything to avoid death, whatever the moral issues or consequences at stake.

A data researcher recently noted that “over the course of the last century, something has dramatically changed in how our species thinks about life and death.” Studies show that young people drink less, fight less, have less sex, and commit fewer crimes than any generation in recorded history. Healthcare spending is escalating while motorcycle ridership and extreme sports participation are plummeting.

The rise of secularism in our post-Christian culture is a clear factor here. When religious belief declines, this world becomes all there is. As George Clooney famously stated,

I don’t believe in heaven and hell. I don’t know if I believe in God. All I know is that as an individual, I won’t allow this life—the only thing I know to exist—to be wasted.

In this context, I find this comment in Hebrews 2 fascinating: through Jesus’ death, he came to “deliver all those who through fear of death were subject to lifelong slavery” (v. 15). Such deliverance transformed his followers, enabling them to embrace missional purpose and significance in this life with no fear of death but only anticipation of reward on its other side.

The fisherman who cowed before a serving girl in fear later stood courageously before the very men who arranged Jesus’ crucifixion (Matthew 26:69–70; Acts 4:5–12). Paul could risk his life for Christ again and again (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:23–33) because he was certain that “for me to live is Christ and to die is gain” (Philippians 1:21).

I have seen pastors in Cuba imperil their families and future to preach God’s word fearlessly. I watched a teenage girl in East Malaysia be baptized in the knowledge that because of her public declaration of faith, she could never go home again. I met a young boy in Singapore whose father beat him for going to church but who continued to live at home because he wanted his family to know about Jesus.

How to “be prepared to live”

Now we have a binary choice. If we are not delivered from the “fear of death,” we will be “subject to lifelong slavery” to it. We will choose sins of commission that promise temporal benefits with no concern for their eternal consequences (cf. Mark 7:20–23). We will also choose sins of omission by refusing to sacrifice in the present for the sake of our witness and our Lord (cf. James 4:17).

However, as Jesus warned, “Everyone who practices sin is a slave to sin” (John 8:34). When we fear our death more than we fear our Lord, avoiding death becomes our lord.

Our other choice is to trust our fear of death to Jesus, asking to be freed from slavery to it and empowered to live courageously for him. Then, when such fear strikes, we can “be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his might” (Ephesians 6:10; cf. Isaiah 41:13). We can claim Jesus’ promise, “Everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die” (John 11:26).

We can embrace the logic of missionary Jim Elliot’s famous declaration, “He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose.” And we will learn to agree with Charles Spurgeon’s assertion:

“To be prepared to die is to be prepared to live.”

Are you “prepared to live” today?

Quote for the day:

“All the glories of midday are eclipsed by the marvels of sunset.” —Charles Spurgeon

Our latest website resources:

• The death of Hulk Hogan and the transforming power of faith
• A proper revival for “The Fantastic Four”
• What does the Bible say about physical health? Five biblical suggestions
• Following Christ in a sports-obsessed world
• For pastors: An antidote to cultural discouragement

Denison Forum