Britain’s Got Talent - I’m never sure if people are clapping for the performers or just because they know they’ve found the next big story, but this is still fun.

Mohler and Carter - Al Mohler: “Today's Thinking in Public program features my interview with former President Jimmy Carter. The conversation was remarkable, and I was honored to have this interview with the 39th President of the United States. The focus of the interview was on the Bible, a book that has framed President Carter's life from his earliest memories. Even now, he remains the world's most famous Sunday School teacher.”

Geraldo and the Hoodies - Thomas Sowell comments on the Trayvon Martin case, saying “Practical advice, not race baiting, shows real concern for minority youth.” He urges caution and warns against jumping to conclusions because “playing with racial polarization is playing with fire.”

The End of the World - This infographic provides a pragmatic argument for not predicting the end of the world.

Psalm 119 - I really enjoyed this way of displaying Psalm 119; it’s very helpful to see it laid out that way.

Next 2012 - This year’s Next conference, the last Next, features a great list of speakers. If you’re in the right demographic, you may want to consider going.

The Christian ministry exists for the promotion of holiness. —Donald MacLeod

Here in Ontario there is a criminal trial taking place of the kind that is so disturbing that I cannot bear to read any details. It involves the taking, raping and killing of a young girl. The very few details I’ve seen in headlines and bylines have been more than enough to convince me that I cannot read any more. It’s just too much, too weighty, too awful.

A trial like this one is always accompanied by cries for justice. There are cries in the media and cries in casual conversation. There are cries in my own heart. When I think of a couple who brutally murder a young girl, my heart cries out for justice. This is a natural cry, I think, and a good one.

Yet so often it seems that the people who do such horrifying things get away with it, or at the very least, do not receive anything even approaching justice. Hitler, the man who sparked the Second World War, a war that took tens of millions of lives, died in 1945, but did so at his own hand. A self-inflicted bullet to the head hardly seems to satisfy the demands of justice based on the lives of millions of Jews and countless millions of other lives destroyed in the war he began. It almost seems that he got away with it. The couple that took the life of that little girl may spend the rest of their lives behind bars but this, too, hardly seems like true justice. I want justice!

When we read in the Bible that the law of God is written on our hearts, this must be some of what we mean--that we have a sense of justice and that we want this sense of justice to be served, to be satisfied. We also know from Scripture that justice will be served. Indeed, it must be served. And we want it to be served. Justice is "the quality of being just or fair;" it is "judgment involved in the determination of rights and the assignment of rewards and punishments." But it is more. A Christian definition of justice goes further. Justice is the due reward or punishment for an act. God must punish evil. We know this. We tremble at this thought. Or we ought to.

Here is some wisdom from Richard Sibbes—the kind of wisdom that, if we could just take it to heart, all the way to heart, it would make every difference in our lives.

If we would make it evident that our conversion is sound we must loathe and hate sin from the heart; now a man shall know his hatred of evil to be true, first if it be universal. He that hates sin truly hates all sin. Secondly, where there is true hatred it is fixed; there is no appeasing it, but by abolishing the thing it hates. Thirdly, hatred is a more rooted affection than anger; anger may be appeased, but hatred is against the whole kind. Fourthly, if our hatred be true, we hate all evil in ourselves first, and then in others. He that hates a toad would hate it most in his own bosom. Many like Judah are severe in censuring others but are partial to themselves (Genesis 38:24). Fifthly, he that hates sin truly, hates the greatest sin in the greatest measure; he hates all evil in a just proportion. Sixthly, our hatred is right if we can endure admonition and reproof for sin and not be enraged with him that tells us of it; therefore those that swell against reproof, hate not sin; only with this caution, it may be done with such indiscretion and self-love that a man may hate the reprover’s proud manner. In disclosing our hatred of sin in others, we must consider our calling; it must be done in a sweet temper, reserving due respect to those to whom reproof is offered, that it may be done out of true zeal, and not out of anger nor pride.

2 Samuel 24:1 states that David took a census of Israel due (at least in part) to the anger of God: “Again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he incited David against them, saying, ‘Go, number Israel and Judah.’” 1 Chronicles 21:1, on the other hand, while recounting the same moment in history, sees David’s action as being influenced by a different source: “Then Satan stood against Israel and incited David to number Israel.”

The difference between these two verses is stark and leaves us with an unavoidable question: Who really incited David? Was it “the LORD” (2 Samuel), or was it “Satan” (1 Chronicles)? Is this an example of the Bible contradicting itself? How are we to reconcile this?

In their book When Critics Ask, Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe show where this same “contradiction” appears elsewhere in the Bible, and give a helpful take on resolving it.

Both statements are true. Although it was Satan who immediately incited David, ultimately it was God who permitted Satan to carry out this provocation. Although it was Satan’s design to destroy David and the people of God, it was God’s purpose to humble David and the people and teach them a valuable spiritual lesson. This situation is quite similar to the first two chapters of Job in which both God and Satan are involved in the suffering of Job. Similarly, both God and Satan are involved in the crucifixion. Satan’s purpose was to destroy the Son of God (John 13:2; 1 Cor 2:8). God’s purpose was to redeem humankind by the death of His Son (Acts 2:14-39).

A similar answer is given in the study note on 2 Samuel 24:1 in the NET Bible. The answer offered here is a little bit different, however, because of the translators’ conviction that the Hebrew word satan in 1 Chronicles 21:1 is best rendered “an adversary” instead of “Satan”:

The Samuel version gives an underlying theological perspective, while the Chronicler simply describes what happened from a human perspective. The adversary in 1 Chr 21:1 is likely a human enemy, probably a nearby nation whose hostility against Israel pressured David into numbering the people so he could assess his military strength.

Whether the Hebrew is best understood as referring to a nearby nation or to Satan himself, the answer to the apparent contradiction is the same: God is sovereign over every aspect of human history, and he uses others to accomplish his perfect plans, regardless of whether or not that is their intention.