Hamas freed seventeen more hostages yesterday; thirty-nine Palestinians were released from Israeli prisons in exchange. Among the hostages Hamas released was Abigail Edan, a four-year-old Israeli-American citizen who witnessed her parents being murdered on October 7. President Biden said at a news conference, “What she endured is unthinkable.”

Emily Hand is another hostage released over the weekend by Hamas. She was at a sleepover at a friend’s house when Hamas invaded and was initially reported killed, but it was later announced that she was among those held hostage. She turned nine while in captivity.

Yaffa Adar is another. The eighty-five-year-old Holocaust survivor and mother of three, grandmother of seven, and great-grandmother of eight was kidnapped from her kibbutz. Her eldest grandson was also taken hostage and remains in Hamas custody.

Amid the elation over receiving some of the hostages, the Wall Street Journal editorial board reminded us that “the cost is a short-term cease-fire that Hamas will exploit, and three-quarters of the 236 hostages will remain in terrorist hands.” They added:

The deal again shows the moral gulf between the two sides. Hamas kidnapped Israeli children as young as nine months to use as hostages and spring its jihadists who have been arrested or convicted in a fair trial for their crimes. Israel takes military risks to save its citizens. Hamas risks Palestinian civilians to save itself.

This “moral gulf” is worth exploring on an even more fundamental level today.

“Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”

John Gray is an emeritus professor of European thought at the London School of Economics and a prolific author. His latest book, The New Leviathans, uses Thomas Hobbes’ 1651 classic Leviathan to explore the rise of totalitarianism in our generation.

In an article for Time, Gray explains Hobbes’ central thesis: humans can achieve a civilized life of peace, prosperity, and culture through a social contract that empowers a ruler whom all will obey. This sovereign power (which Hobbes called a “leviathan” after the sea monster in the book of Job), whether a king or a governing assembly, would be unbounded in its powers, but its authority would be limited to maintaining peace.

Hobbes believed that humans need such a ruler because we live in a state of nature he described as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” However, in Gray’s view, such “leviathans” as we are seeing in Putin’s Russia, China’s Xi, and Western “woke” ideologies fail the people they are empowered to protect.

The reason is both simple and catastrophic: rulers are as subject to fallen human nature as those they rule. They are as tempted to be their own gods (Genesis 3:5) as the people they theoretically serve. More so, in fact: the “will to power” that Nietzsche so powerfully identifies becomes even more tempting as power becomes more available.

As the British historian Lord Acton observed, “Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

“Nobody should blame us for the things we do”

Gray’s analysis explains why there will be “wars and rumors of war” until the Lord returns (Matthew 24:6). The ongoing exchange of hostages for prisoners will not end the conflict between Israel and Hamas.

To the contrary: Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad, when asked if his goal was the annihilation of Israel, replied, “Yes, of course. We must remove that country.” He added: “We are the victims of the occupation. Full stop. Therefore, nobody should blame us for the things we do. On October 7, October 10, October million, everything we do is justified.” The fact that Gaza has not been “occupied” by Israel since 2005 makes no difference, apparently.

The only remedy for the sinful human heart is one illustrated by the hostages-for-prisoners exchanges over the weekend: trading the innocent for the guilty to free the latter through the suffering of the former.

Here is the solution we need: “We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God. For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:20–21). At the cross, the Father transferred your sins and mine onto his sinless Son, who then paid our debt with his life: “The wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).

“It’s not in the stars to hold our destiny”

As the Christmas season begins, I want to urge us to remember that we were guilty prisoners exchanged for an innocent Savior. Jesus came “to set at liberty those who are oppressed” (Luke 4:18, fulfilling Isaiah 61:1). The One born in a Bethlehem manger died on a Jerusalem cross. Your cross. My cross.

One of the symptoms of human fallenness is the delusion that we can save ourselves. Our secularized society assures us that we can be our own Leviathan, that we are the customers and consumers of our culture. In this calculus, holy days become holidays; Christmas is about Black Friday, Cyber Monday, and nonstop consumption until we “ring in the New Year” not with prayer and fasting but with parties and feasting.

Maya Rudolph encouraged us to “create your own destiny.” William Faulkner similarly opined, “Man is indestructible because of his simple will to freedom.” Shakespeare was adamant: “It’s not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves.”

To whom will you entrust your destiny today?

Denison Forum

Israel and Hamas have agreed to a deal by which Hamas will free fifty civilian hostages in return for the release of 150 Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails and a four-day pause in fighting. The first hostages could be freed as early as tomorrow. US officials hope this deal in Israel could lead to the release of many more hostages, including those held by Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

In all the reporting I’ve seen on this agreement, here’s a question no one has asked: Why is it that only the jihadists take hostages? Israeli forces have been inside Gaza for several weeks—why have they not taken a single Palestinian hostage to use as leverage with Hamas?

---

NOTE: I have written a book on the Israel–Hamas war which we are releasing as a free digital download. I invite you to get your copy here.

---

“We love death like our enemies love life!”

The answer is simple: the two have very different views regarding the sanctity of human life.

Israel’s worldview, rooted in the Hebrew Bible, believes that all people are created in God’s image and likeness (Genesis 1:27). They consider hostages to be especially valuable: their central prayer, recited three times a day, speaks of God’s compassion as one who “heals the sick and frees the captives.” The Babylonian Talmud teaches that being held captive is worse than death or famine, for it includes them both.

This is why they freed 1,027 Palestinian prisoners in exchange for a single Israeli soldier in 2011. Over the years, they have released about seven thousand Palestinian prisoners to secure the freedom of nineteen Israelis and to retrieve the bodies of eight others.

Hamas, by contrast, stated in its original charter: “Jihad is its path and death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.” They claim, “We love death like our enemies love life!” They view Muslims who die in war as martyrs who will be rewarded in paradise.

How we view the sanctity of human life is foundational to the society we create. Israel, as I have witnessed in more than thirty trips to the Holy Land, has built a thriving economy for the benefit of its citizens. Hamas uses Palestinian civilians as human shields and steals aid intended for them to construct tunnels and acquire weapons for killing Jews.

When we view each person as sacred, our definition of success changes dramatically.

Playing Scrabble in five languages

John F. Kennedy and C. S. Lewis both died on this day sixty years ago.

By most measures, both would be considered enormously successful. In a recent Gallup survey, Mr. Kennedy was the highest-rated former US president. He had a net worth of $300 million at the time of his death; in 2015, Forbes estimated the Kennedy family’s net worth at $1.2 billion. His presidential museum is one of my favorites and a lasting tribute to his iconic cultural status.

C. S. Lewis achieved remarkable success as well. He was a true genius, receiving three “firsts” from Oxford (the equivalent of graduating summa cum laude three times) and serving on the faculties of Oxford and Cambridge. (He also played Scrabble with his wife in five languages.) He attained national fame for his radio talks on the BBC during World War II and was featured on the cover of Time magazine in 1947. More than two hundred million copies of his books have been sold.

However, I will always remember my surprise upon visiting his home for the first time. Known as “the Kilns,” it is a modest house where he lived, wrote, and died. Lewis gave away most, if not all, of the proceeds of his books, often making his donations anonymously. He never bought a car or learned to drive and seldom traveled. He put his money in an “Agape Fund” and donated so much of it that a friend had to advise him to keep a third for taxes.

He was just as generous with his time, laboriously responding to each and every letter he received. His personal correspondence was so vast that it has been collected in three volumes.

“You have never met a mere mortal”

What explains Lewis’s extreme personal generosity? Consider this observation in The Weight of Glory:

There are no ordinary people. You have never met a mere mortal. Nations, cultures, arts, civilization—these are mortal, and their life is to ours as the life of a gnat. But it is immortals whom we joke with, work with, marry, snub, and exploit—immortal horrors or everlasting splendors.

Lewis was convinced—rightly—that people are inestimably significant, far above anything the material world can give or measure. As a result, he wisely invested his resources where they would bring the greatest return.

As did his Lord. Scripture says of Jesus: “By him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible—whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him” (Colossians 1:16). And yet he chose to make humans, knowing that our sins would cost him the cross (Revelation 13:8 NIV). And then he died a tortured, excruciating death for us (Romans 5:8). He would do it all over again, just for you.

Such sacrificial love is abundant cause for gratitude this Thanksgiving week and every day of every year.

“It is not your business to succeed”

Serving people in the will of God is the highest and best definition of success. The more we obey our Father’s calling to “serve one another, as good stewards of God’s varied grace” (1 Peter 4:10), the more successful our lives become.

C. S. Lewis was adamant on this point: “It is not your business to succeed, but to do right. When you have done so the rest lies with God.” Billy Graham likewise asked:

How does God define success? His measure is very different from the world’s measure, and it can be summed up in one sentence: Success in God’s eyes is faithfulness to his calling. Paul was a failure in the world’s eyes—but not to God. Even Jesus was a failure as far as most people were concerned, but “he was faithful to the one who appointed him” [Hebrews 3:2 NIV]—and that is all that mattered.

What is your definition of success? Is it the same as God’s—and are you pursuing it?

How would you answer his questions today?

Denison Forum

As you know, former First Lady Rosalynn Carter died Sunday afternoon at the age of ninety-six. Former President Jimmy Carter said, “Rosalynn was my equal partner in everything I ever accomplished.”

A tireless advocate for mental health services, Mrs. Carter was instrumental in passing the Mental Health Systems Act of 1980 and continued her work on this vital cause for decades after. In 1982, she and her husband founded the Carter Center, a nonprofit dedicated to a range of issues from improving global health to monitoring democratic elections to negotiating peace agreements. She could often be found volunteering with Habitat for Humanity along with her husband in building homes for those in need.

In a day when many leaders use their public platforms for personal celebrity, Rosalynn Carter used hers to serve others.

“A kind of private barn of money”

According to Guido Alfani, an economic history professor at Bocconi University in Milan, the wealthiest members of society have often in Western history been expected to use their riches “to support their societies in times of crises like plagues, famines, or wars.” For example, the Tuscan humanist Poggio Bracciolini wrote in 1428 that “many greedy individuals” should “constitute a kind of private barn of money able to be of assistance to everybody.”

Those who gave charitably were not being entirely altruistic, however. Alfani notes that they wanted to allay the unfavorable way they were viewed by others and also saw such charity as contributing to “the benefit of their souls.”

Such transactional benevolence is rooted in fallen human nature. For example, after Jesus announced his intention to go to Jerusalem where he would “be killed, and on the third day be raised” (Matthew 16:21), Peter “began to rebuke him, saying, ‘Far be it from you Lord! This shall never happen to you’” (v. 22). Jesus responded: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man” (v. 23).

Why did Jesus say this to Peter?

The apostle wanted Jesus to be a military messiah who would overthrow the hated Romans, not a suffering servant who would die on their cross. Even after Jesus’ resurrection, Peter and the other disciples asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6). They wanted him to do what they wanted, using him as a means to their ends. In this way, Peter was “setting his mind” not on the “things of God” but on “the things of man.” He was serving Jesus so Jesus would serve him.

This is what fuels Hamas in its drive to eradicate Israel so its Mahdi (a messianic figure) will return to rule the world for Muslims, including themselves. It fuels Christian nationalists who want God to bless America for the advancement of their communities and aspirations.

I say all of that to say this: an excellent test of character is to see how sacrificially we serve others when such service does not benefit us personally.

The paradoxical problem with our focus on evangelism

Jesus is Exhibit A of such character. He testified that he “came not to be served but to serve” (Mark 10:45a). Then he proved it when he “[gave] his life as a ransom for many” (v. 45b). This fact highlights a foundational reason for Thanksgiving this holiday week: expressing gratitude to Christ for his selfless, sacrificial love.

A practical way we can thank Jesus for his grace is by sharing that grace with others. After washing his disciples’ feet, he called them to “wash one another’s feet” (John 13:14). We demonstrate our love for our Lord by our love for our neighbor (Matthew 22:37–39). The best way you can serve me is to serve my family.

Here’s the problem: we evangelicals tend to focus more on experiencing grace in salvation (Ephesians 2:8–9) than on God’s call to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Peter 3:18, my emphasis). Paradoxically, this omission limits our evangelistic effectiveness since we need such intimacy with Christ that his Spirit transforms us into his character (Romans 8:29) and manifests his grace to others (Galatians 5:22–23).

Exhibiting such character is vital if we are to reach our skeptical, post-Christian culture with the good news of God’s love.

The “three worlds of evangelicalism”

Aaron Renn was a partner at Accenture and senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research before turning to a career as a writer on cultural issues. His February 2022 First Things article on the “three worlds of evangelicalism” was especially significant and urgent.

In it, he shows that American evangelicals have moved from the “positive world” (pre–1994) in which we were largely viewed as contributing to society, to the “neutral world” (1994–2014) in which we were viewed as one option among many, to the “negative world” (2014–present) in which we are seen as a threat to the public good and the new public moral order. In my book The Coming Tsunami I document this shift as well.

In such an antagonistic culture, it is even more imperative that you and I manifest our Lord’s selfless, sacrificial spirit of service:

• When skeptics reject us, we know that they especially need our intercession and we “pray for those who persecute you” (Matthew 5:44).
• When they reject our message, we know that they especially need to know God’s love and we redouble our sacrificial efforts to share our Lord with them (cf. Acts 4:8–12; 5:29–32).
• When people need resources we possess, we choose to “do good to everyone” (Galatians 6:10), remembering that we are “serving the Lord Christ” (Colossians 3:24; cf. Matthew 25:40).

To this end, let’s make time this Thanksgiving week to offer Jesus our worship and gratitude for his sacrificial love for us. Then let’s see opportunities to serve our family, friends, and others as invitations to demonstrate his selfless character in our compassion.

St. Fulgentius of Ruspe (AD 460–533) described the transformation God intends for his children: “They are enlightened and converted, thus passing from death to life, sinfulness to holiness, unbelief to faith, and evil actions to holy life.”

Will those you see this week see this transformation in you?

Denison Forum