Melbourne was an exciting place to be over the weekend.
No, I’m not referring to the footy. Carlton, what are you doing to me?!
Hundreds of men attended the Belgrave Heights Men’s Convention and sat under the word with Sam Allberry and Stephen McAlpine. Lots of Churches around the city and suburbs preached Christ and believers were encouraged and non Christians were intrigued. I was at the Baptist BBQ while the Melbourne Anglican Diocese met to decide who would become the next Archbishop.
For decades the tide has been going out as the force of secularism and scepticism has claimed moral victory after intellectual triumph. And yet, left behind on the sandy shores around Port Phillip Bay isn’t the kind of happiness and freedom and contentment that we were promised. Instead, our streets and suburbs are floundering under the pressure of what is perhaps the worst mental crisis in our history, and growing social, economic, and relationship strain. My generation and my parents’ generation persist in closing the windows, locking the doors and telling the kids that there’s nothing outside; there is no God worth looking to let alone trusting for life. Not everyone is buying that script any longer. The emptying tide has left behind millions of people and exposed layers of rubbish on the sand produced by the materialist ideal.
We are not happier. We are not safer. We are not more content.
Is it surprising that we are hearing reports and stories of a gentle tide coming into shore in the UK and parts of the United States? In some parts of Asia and South America, it is a high tide with huge numbers of people, including Gen Z and younger who are becoming Christians and joining Churches and discovering that the God of the Bible is God today.
We are not seeing a fast-moving incoming tide in Melbourne, but something is happening. I know there are recent reports of baptismal floods, but I suspect some at least are spurious. Nonetheless, there is something happening. Government and academic institutions are continuing to double down on sexual ethics and religious freedom issues, progressive Churches continue to play those songs on their playlist, and yet there is a gentle counter voice that can be heard.
Anecdotally, across various Baptist churches and Anglican, in University Christian groups, and among our Orthodox and Roman Catholic friends, young adults are experiencing Christianity for the first time. They are ignoring the warning signs that my generation posted on every street corner. There is a curiosity emerging, an interest in Jesus, and an intrigue to discover the meaning of the world’s most important book: the Bible.
I wonder, if the Anglican Archbishop election is another small sign of a changing tide toward evangelical Christianity. 4 candidates were nominated for Anglican Archbishop of Melbourne; all 4 are evangelical Christians: Wei Han Kuan, Tim Johnson, Megan Curlis-Gibson, and Ric Thorpe. Someone may correct me, but this is rare and possibly the first time in many decades that all candidates are evangelical. This alone is significant and a result for which we should be thankful.
Ric Thorpe was elected on Saturday afternoon and will be installed as the new Archbishop later this year. Bishop Ric Thorpe is an Englishman with a pedigree from Holy Trinity Brompton and training at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford. He is one of the few Church of England Bishops to uphold a Christian understanding of marriage and human sexuality. He is passionate about evangelism and church planting. These are all great indicators.
Melbourne needs more churches. Melbourne needs 100s more Christ-centred, Gospel-believing and preaching, people-loving churches.
I’m not an Anglican so feel free to take my observations with the same volume of water found in a baptismal font (bad joke). My Melbourne Anglican friends are overwhelmingly encouraged and thankful for all candidates and the outcome, even as the Diocese looks over troubled waters. Like all our Christian denominations, much deep work of theological and spiritual reform needs to take place. Theological liberalism and moral progressivism is like sand in the car after a day at the beach; the granules find their way into different spots and crevices and lingers long afterwards with distraction and annoyance. The fact is, most of our churches (across denominations) are in decline, and biblical literacy and cultural understanding are shallow. That can lead to desperate pragmatism or compromise. But mission with fraudulent theology won’t save anybody, just as sound doctrine without love gives people a spiritual migraine. Church planting without the Gospel is the devil’s strategy. Who would want to be in Christian leadership today?
And yet Christ is on the throne. Evangelism and church planting and revitalisation isn’t God’s Plan B. It’s always been Plan A and there is no plan B. The Gospel remains God’s power to save. The Church is the bride and centrepiece of God’s redeeming purposes. Let’s be thankful for Christian leaders who are convinced of this and who in love can navigate our churches in the shallows and deep.
It may be that as the cultural tide withdraws, small rock pools and large ones will be left behind, and they will become safe places for people to splash and swim and come to know the God who saves. Gospel Churches may be easier to spot and more inviting for those who need rest.
I sense a quiet excitement mixed with soberness as we see the landscape before us. Did we see a glimpse of things to come this past weekend? May it drive God’s people to prayer and eagerness.
Almost as important, someone needs to nudge Ric Thorpe toward the right footy club (Carlton) and teach him how to make a decent coffee and double-check that his visa includes a condition on who to support in the Ashes later this year.
Today millions of Australians will wake up enthused and celebrating the outcome of yesterday’s Federal election. Many others will be despondent and even angry as the candidates of their preferred party lost. To be honest, I suspect millions more Australians are waking up today with a degree of political indifference as they carry on making breakfast and figuring out how to pay their bills and care for their families and wondering how Carlton’s season ended up this way! A plethora of responses are understandable. For the Christian, who may also empathise with and see themselves at some place along this spectrum, there is one constancy. Psalm 146 famously says,
“Do not put your trust in princes,
in human beings, who cannot save.
When their spirit departs, they return to the ground;
on that very day their plans come to nothing.
Blessed are those whose help is the God of Jacob,
whose hope is in the Lord their God.”
These words remain true, before and after the votes had been cast and counted.
I understand that in quoting Psalm 146, some people might be a little annoyed and perhaps a tad angry, especially among voters disappointed by the election result. I certainly don’t mean to sound unfeeling or facile, as though the election was unimportant. I happen to believe elections do matter because government plays a significant role in the life of society; controlling much power and influence. After all, Government is a legitimate institution that falls under the banner of God’s common grace. It may not be the main game, but government nonetheless plays an important supporting role.
It is also the case that Government has less influence in setting the direction for society as it is about providing the legal, economic, and social mechanisms by which society moves in the direction that it is already preferencing. The old adage about politics being downstream of culture is complicated but still true.
The reason behind sharing the Psalm 146 quotation is that I’m wondering if we are attaching too much responsibility on Government for fixing social ills and rectifying economic currents. This is true for both the left and the right of politics. Have we become too dependent upon Parliaments and MPs for addressing what was once the prevue of churches, synagogues, media, and an array of social organisations? If we have lost trust in those civil and religious institutions (which seems to be the case), faith in our governments is also in sharp decline. There lies perhaps some of our misplaced faith and therefore frustration and despair at the political scene. We are not meant to burden Government with all our hopes and demands and needs. A healthy society needs to spread that load. Indeed, a truly healthy society would not require government to create what we have in Australia: a society wrapped in red tape and wads of laws and rules stickier than gaffer tape.
There are better governments and worse; it’s rarely a zero-sum game. I suspect there is also a deep suspicion of and discontent toward political parties across the spectrum. Sometimes it’s a case of choosing the least bad option available, or at least that’s how many voters are feeling: I don’t like this candidate, but at least they’re not the other candidates!
How did we respond to the election at church today? This morning my church prayed for the new state government, as we do regularly for whoever is in charge at Spring Street and in Canberra. And we also prayed for our local representatives in Parliament. That’s what Christians do. It’s one of the few constancies in the unpredictable world of politics; churches pray for those in authority. To the reluctant among us, let’s consider it this way, if the Apostle Paul could pray for the Roman Emperor, then I think we can pray for our governments.
We should pray for our political representatives because they carry significant responsibility. Given the platform that we build for our leaders (or scaffold as it may be), praying is the right thing to do. Of course, government isn’t the big game in town, but its role impacts life at every level and therefore great wisdom, patience, integrity and compassion are necessary.
Without some kind of cultural reorientation, I suspect Governments will become bigger and bolder. It is interesting to see how Australians, or at least Victorians, have become more comfortable with authoritarian personality and politically styled governing. The myth of the convict, bushranger, and nonchalant Aussie digger may still exist in local sporting clubs, but as a people group, we are quite accepting of big government and monocratic-styled leadership. I’m not arguing a case either way here but simply noting the public trend.
Of course, my eyesight is myopic and so looking at the next 3 years is an imprecise art. There are, after all, no more prophets! My guess is that in the name of freedom, more laws and regulations will be introduced, and in the name of economic prosperity, more debt-inducing spending will occur, and we will remain desperately ill-prepared for the geo-political challenges that lie ahead. If we follow the now predominant current, I anticipate that we’ll see tighter controls on social behaviour, fewer parental rights and a more pronounced religion-socio education drive. In part, we’re recognising a fragmentation in society and so looking for answers is only natural and desirable (depending of course upon the solutions offered).
So I go back to the verse I began with, Christians should not look to government to be the saviour of society. Don’t put your trust in princes and prime ministers. Honour them and pray for them, but let’s not expect government to rescue society from the deepest and darkest of places.
This is one of the flaws present in much of politics today; people believe and expect Government is the answer. Big government has devotees on both the left and the right. Hence it’s no surprise to see legislative agendas enveloping society around a new moral religion. It’s interesting to see how churches have become more visible as politicians vie for attention and votes. ‘Social cohesion’ is one of the buzz words. God is optional in the new religion, and where he is worshipped, he somehow always supports the popular moral zeitgeist!
Among some Christians, there are more strident and public voices. Christians, be careful of voices that speak more about politics than they do the Great Commission and use more words of outrage than they do words of compassion and mercy. By all means, as a commitment to common grace and out of love for your neighbour, keep government accountable. Christians might join a political party and stand for Parliament, but even the most Christian of political leaders and most Christian of political agendas isn’t going to redeem society. That kind of thinking ignores the testimony of Scripture, namely that the gospel is God’s power of salvation and the church is God’s big game in town. Our churches are more likely today to sit on the sideline of culture and be ignored by many, but nonetheless, the church is the centrepiece of God’s work. Therefore, whatever you do in the name of political inspiration, aspiration or disappointment, don’t confuse it with the Gospel, don’t conflate common grace with saving grace, and don’t fuse the church with the state.
The best way we can love our fellow country people is by serving your church and being clear on the gospel. Today at church, pray for government and for those in authority, and give thanks for free and safe elections. And be clear on the gospel. If we love the Lord our God with all our heart, mind, and strength we will also love our neighbours, and that will have real and positive outcomes for our society. That kind of humble constant Christ-like hope hope-filled living may have a greater effect for the good of society than even an election.
This is the question posed by Bari Weiss. We can certainly ask the question of Australia. It’s not as though what happens in America will necessarily follow here in Australia, but their weather conditions often blow across the Pacific Ocean.
It comes to mind that there was the prophet from Crete quoted in Titus 1:12 and Epimenides gets a mention by the Apostle in his famed Areopagus speech. And let’s not to forget the Aussie band Crowded House who are getting a mention in this week’s sermon at church. There are moments when an unbeliever says something that is true either about God or about the world or Christianity, and their commentary is worth reflecting upon.
My mate Stephen McAlpine has been talking up Bari Weiss’ podcast, Honestly. Another friend drew my attention to one recent episode which I watched with interest yesterday.
For those who are unaware, Bari Weiss isn’t a Christian. She is a former New York Times journalist who famously resigned and now writes for other publications. Weiss is agnostic (former atheist?) and Jewish and a woman who’s married to another woman. There are obviously some things here out of sync with the message of Jesus Christ, especially the New York Times! (that’s a joke, sort of). Bari Weiss is among a growing throng of intellectuals who are dissatisfied with the cultural zeitgeist and who despite their unbelief, are warming to Christianity, or at least becoming positively disposed toward some of Christianity’s historical, ethical and sociological strengths. It’s as though they recognise that when a society dismantles Christianity, it’s like removing the steel frame from a building; it loses its sturdiness and begins to succumb to the environment and weather conditions surrounding it.
I have now listened to several of Weiss’ interviews, including a recent one with Jonathan Rauch. And it’s this interview that I wish to shine a light on.
Jonathan Rauch is an American journalist and Senior Fellow with the Brookings Institute. He has a pedigree from Yale University and writing for The Economist and The Atlantic. Like Weiss, Jonathan Rauch is not a Christian. He makes that clear in this podcast episode. Indeed, Weiss introduces him as an atheist Jewish gay man. As Rauch admits during the interview, he was no friend of Christianity and Christians and yet something is changing. He says,
“20 years ago I was in the camp that said America was secularising and isn’t that great. Religion is divisive and dogmatic and we’re going to have less of it and we’re going to be like Sweden or Denmark and Scandinavia, and we’ll be happier.
I was completely wrong about that. It has been the biggest mistake of my intellectual career.”
It is worth watching the full one-hour interview, both to hear Raunch’s interesting insights, and also just to hear how two thoughtful unbelievers are now engaging with Christianity.
During the conversation with Bari Weiss, Rauch wants to argue for Christianity in the sense that it provides the necessary pillars for liberal democracy. Rauch identifies 3 key pillars of Christianity and therefore of liberal democracy:
Don’t be afraid
Be like Jesus
Forgive each other.
He explains how these ideas were and remain radical and derive from the Christian faith. I would quibble about what are the pillars of Christianity and we can talk about this another time. But these 3 ideas are nonetheless revolutionary and were introduced into the world by Christianity. They have been so successful that we often take them for granted today without realising that dismantling Christianity will create significant problems for social and civil flourishing.
My interest in this interview centres on Rauch’s explanation of thin Christianity and sharp Christianity. It’s how Rauch attempts to call out and even plead with Christians to be more Christian, not less.
‘Thin Christianity’, as the adjective suggests, thins out Christian distinctive such that society finds the ideas palatable. It’s classic theological liberalism. Let’s thin out all those tricky Bible ideas that progressive society finds offensive. That kind of Christianity is still around in the United States and Australia, but it’s generally easy to spot as it’s lauded by social pundits and found in emptying churches.
Rauch also observes the rise of ‘sharp Christianity’. He looks back to the 1980s and the rise of the political evangelical but notes how this has escalated in the last 8-9 years. It is his view that among American Evangelicals there is a drift from the character of Jesus. To be clear, he’s not clumping all evangelicals under this ‘sharp’ umbrella and of course, as an unbeliever, Rauch isn’t defining these issues in a gospel and theological way. Nonetheless, his point has merit.
Rauch talks about sharp Christianity being ‘political and polarised’. He goes into some detail about how President Trump played for the conservative Christian vote and offered a seat at the White House. As Rauch notes, the promise of power is an ancient one. I’ve read enough over the years to see some evangelicals sacrificing gospel humility and clarity for an invitation to a White House prayer meeting or inside conversations with policymakers.
Interestingly Rauch differentiates between the older politicised evangelical, which was a top-down movement, and the more recent interaction which is bottom-up. I have certainly heard stories where people began attending and joining churches based on the church’s political stance.
Rauch goes on to make this rather chilling comment regarding young adults in America,
“They no longer believed that the church believed what it’s meant to believe.”
Where this is true, there’s a major problem.
The rhetoric Rauch is hearing among the ‘sharp Christians’ is,
’We don’t want to hear about turning the other cheek, we want to talk about taking back our country’.
Similar rhetoric is becoming more commonplace among some Australian Christian voices. It may not be the dominant voice, but it is certainly a noisy one and one vying for influence. Just yesterday one Christian pastor suggested I was the Devil for saying Christians should be more like Jesus instead of adding to the anger and fragmentation that’s perforating all around us.
This politicisation of Christianity has the habit of confusing the gospel, conflating Church and State, and misplacing eschatological hope by trying to drag the new creation into the present. I’ve been writing about this unseemly conjugality for several years now. It is not that Christians have nothing to say or contribute to civil society. A liberal democracy enables and needs people of faith to bring their ideas and convictions to the table. And as Jonathan Rauch recognises, a healthy liberal democracy is a fruitful branch born from Christian theism. And yet, as Jesus and the Apostles made clear distinctions between common grace and particular grace, and between the two ages in which we live, so must Christians today.
1 Peter is very much on my mind as we preach through the Petrine Epistle at church. Peter is pretty clear about where Christian hope lies, what Christian identity is, and therefore how we relate to different parts of society.
He says,
“ Dear friends, I urge you, as foreigners and exiles, to abstain from sinful desires, which wage war against your soul. 12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, 14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. 15 For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. 16 Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. 17 Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.” (1 Peter 2:11-17)
If our language and speech toward others is frequently out of sync with the apostle’s instructions, there is a problem.
Both thin and sharp Christianity share a common goal even if their modus operandi differs. They both aim to win influence and people and to take the culture or country; the former does so by diluting Christian doctrine and life, and the other by using Christian ideas as a sledgehammer. Both may win approval in various quarters and even notch a few political wins, and we likely lose people’s souls and dishonour the Christ whom we claim to worship and follow.
I hope we can say that we want to avoid both thin Christianity and sharp Christianity. Instead, we need a Christianity that is both thick and grace-filled, deep and clear. And the only way to do that is to become more Gospel-centred, not less, more Bible not less, and more Spirit-filled not less. Christians can engage in the public square but don’t take your script from the culture. Public speech is to be conducted out of love for our neighbours, not about punching your opponents to the ground. Engagement in the culture should be about promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not ensuring your favoured political party wins the next election. I’m not suggesting that public issues are unimportant to the Christian; but surely we have a bigger mandate and vision in mind.
Bari Weiss and Jonathan Rauch are not confessing the Lordship of Christ or believing in the atonement. But their tune has changed. Let’s pray that their appreciation of Christ becomes a genuine trust in Him. If Nicodemus the scholar could approach Jesus at night to ask questions and realise there is something true and good about Jesus, then those asking serious questions in the light of day may also find what Jesus alone can give.
Christianity isn’t a commodity, it’s about a person. Christianity is more than a political theory or ethical system, but is knowing the God of the cosmos, and being reconciled to Him because of the brutality God’s Son embraced for us. As Peter explained to the early churches,
“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God”.
There is my Gospel call for today. Let’s return to Christians. The temptation to be a thin or sharp Christian isn’t new. How many times have I now heard someone wanting to be John Knox!
There is warrant to Rauch’s complaint, even if he falls short of where we need to be in following Jesus. Don’t be a thin Christian or a sharp Christian. Instead, be a Jesus Christian (as if there’s another kind!). For one final time, press closely to what Peter the Apostle instructs. Take a couple of minutes to read what Peter says and reflect upon our public voice in light of these verses. Sure, it’s unlikely to win an election or change society overnight, but it is better and it is desperately what the world needs of Christians today,
“Finally, all of you, be like-minded, be sympathetic, love one another, be compassionate and humble. 9 Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. 10 For,
“Whoever would love life and see good days must keep their tongue from evil and their lips from deceitful speech.
They must turn from evil and do good; they must seek peace and pursue it.
For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous and his ears are attentive to their prayer, but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”
Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.’ (1 Peter 3:8-16)
If Peter’s exhortation grates on us, then take that as God’s alarm going off and seek his grace to work out how your heart might more align with His.
The NSW Parliament last week adopted a set of laws prohibiting the conversion of or suppression of peoples sexuality orientation and gender identity. The laws are not as extreme as those in the State of Victoria, nonetheless, there is clear government overreach.
Yes, these new laws in places are bad. They are bad because they introduce needless restrictions on normal Christian faith and practice. They are bad laws because they are defending against practices that are mostly mythical. The laws are bad because they take a smidgen of truth and a lot of illegitimate and aggressive sexology (to use Stephen Mcalpine’s word). The are bad laws because the give Government greater authority over religion (which is an odd position for anyone positing that we are a secular country).
Associate Professor Neil Foster has written a helpful explanation of what the laws do and do not mean and where is ambiguity. I would encourage people to read Foster’s article in light of some misinformation that is floating around and being circulated as fact.
However, Christians have begun to respond to these new laws. I’ve noticed more than a few turning to the Old Testament prophet, Daniel, and have begun quoting that famous incident that landed him in a lion’s den. I happen to think the story of Daniel is one of many helpful Bible places we can turn to as a guide and encouragement. But if we’re going to use Daniel ch.6 for our stump speech, there are a couple of details we need to first take into account.
Firstly, what kind of presence are we in society?
Notice how Babylon’s officials and powerbrokers describe Daniel,
“At this, the administrators and the satraps tried to find grounds for charges against Daniel in his conduct of government affairs, but they were unable to do so. They could find no corruption in him, because he was trustworthy and neither corrupt nor negligent. Finally these men said, “We will never find any basis for charges against this man Daniel unless it has something to do with the law of his God.” (Daniel 6:4-5)
Daniel is a wonderful example to Christians today. There is something that particularly resonates with us about the life and times of Daniel for he was an exile living away from his home, as are all Christians today. He is living and working in a context with foreign gods and ideas dominate the horizon and we’re worshipping God is part of a small minority. Part of the wisdom that we glean from the book of Daniel, and it is a book of wisdom, is how Daniel adapted to life in Babylon and worked hard and judiciously for the common good, and yes obeyed pagan Kings, yet without compromising faithfulness to the one true God.
There have been an inflation of open letters and public declarations of late, mostly from a particular quarter of the Christian faith. These are often highlighting genuine issues, but their content and tone often fall short of usefulness. As someone who has had moments in the past when I’ve employed too many strong adjectives, I’m more conscious these days about precision and not overblowing a situation. It is advisable to read and research before putting your name to a public statement.
As the enraged mood takes hold of so many quarters of society, a Christian voice should be different, but sometimes it is as angry and hyperbolic and therefore indistuishable from others. For example, if your public record is filled with distain for authorities and governments and making antiauthoritarian claims whenever you disagree with a policy or law, when a legitimate concern finally arises, why would those in positions of authority listen to you? It’s like the percussionist in a Symphony Orchestra who is always smashing the symbols as hard as she can strike and often out of time with the rest of the Orchestra. Soon enough the orchestra is going to send you down to the basement and lock you out!
Who wants to listen to the guy who is always shouting at everyone? Who takes seriously the voices who are decrying every issue as a threat to freedom and democracy and religion?
Defiance seems to be the default modus operandi for too many Christians today. However, this shouldn’t be our baseline approach to life in the world and it’s certainly not the way Daniel approached life in Babylon.
There will be some other Christians who have no issue with the new laws in NSW and who are trying to con us into thinking that anyone criticising the law is pulling a furphy. I suspect they’ll be among those who volunteer to be part of the firing squad.
Second, notice how Daniel responded to the unreasonable law.
“Now when Daniel learned that the decree had been published, he went home to his upstairs room where the windows opened toward Jerusalem. Three times a day he got down on his knees and prayed, giving thanks to his God, just as he had done before. Then these men went as a group and found Daniel praying and asking God for help. So they went to the king…”
Daniel continues with what was his normal practice. He didn’t make a song and dance out of it. He simply continued to faithfully pray to God three times a day.
Daniel’s praying wasn’t attention seeking, or brash, he wasn’t revving up the social temperature or resorting to hyperbolic claims or allegations. The window was always open and he carried on as he had always done, with humility and faithfulness.
The problem is, and I understand because I know the injustice of the Victorian laws, too many people are wanting to be David swinging a rock at Goliath’s head, rather than a humble Daniel who went about faithfully serving the Lord and serving the common good of the city where he lived.
In case we think, maybe Daniel is just a one off, I’m about to start a new sermon series at Mentone Baptist on 1 Peter. With little imagination required, I’ve given our series the title, ‘Living away from home’. Like Daniel, Christians are exiles and sojourners, and Peter helpfully explains how Christians ought to live as exiles. In one place he says this,
“Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.For it is better, if it is God’s will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil. (1 Peter 3:13-17)
There is a sense in which we are to embrace suffering for the Lord’s sake. And the manner in which we do also matters according to Peter. Gentleness and respect…not resorting to malicious speech but with good behaviour. So like Daniel and Peter, choose faithfulness, and like Daniel and Peter (and Jesus), part of faithfulness is speaking and behaving with utmost integrity and with grace and refusing to be that clanging cymbal.
Hamas has paraded four coffins through the streets of Gaza as though they were trophies. Men brandishing their rifles, flagging Hamas regalia while masking their faces, cheered and accompanied four black coffins carrying four Israelis who had been taken hostage on October 7 and murdered subsequently. The 4 coffins included an elderly man, Oded Lifshitz, 83, the two little Bibas children, and their mother, Shiri.
The remains of these 4 human beings were then presented on a stage wrapped in anti-Israel messages and weapons to threaten.
Once the bodies were handed over to the Red Cross and eventually returned to Israel, propaganda was found stuffed inside the coffins. If such insult and injury were not more than the grieving could cope with, it turns out Shiri Bibas was not among the dead. Hamas had placed the body of another woman inside the coffin.
We ought to feel sickened inside at the pictures being shown around the world; I am. I will not show the footage here. Instead, here are Israelis lining the streets as the coffins are driven by.
To humiliate the body of the deceased is to move into a new level of hatred. It is to join the ranks of cultures who abused flesh and bone to humiliate and cripple them in the life to come. This is the action of a deranged and evil group. Sadly, we can already imagine the excuses and justifications being uttered in Hamas’ defence, such are the times we are now living in.
Criminals are afforded a proper burial. Even in war, the dead are respected by the enemy. Mustafa Kamal famously said of the Anzacs buried at Gallipoli,
You, the mothers who sent their sons from faraway countries, wipe away your tears; your sons are now lying in our bosom and are in peace. After having lost their lives on this land they have become our sons as well.
The human body matters, both in life and in death. Our physical being is part of who we are. God has made us with body, mind, heart, and spirit. Harming the body is an affront to human dignity and life. Mistreating the remains of the dead signals a level of disdain both for the dead and for those who are left behind that is inhuman.
A human body is treated with such respect because the life of the human being is of incalculable worth. To return the wrong body and to return bodies with ignominious glee and to stuff coffins with propaganda is unspeakably shocking.
God values the human body so much that his only Son took on human flesh. He became incarnate, a man. When Jesus was crucified he was buried. When God raised the same Jesus to life, he was resurrected, that is with a real physical living heart beating body.
There is so much evil in our world. It has been this way since the fall. The hubris of the optimist believed that with advancing science and technology, and with prosperity winning globally, the world will enter a new age of progress and even ‘the end of history’. This is not utopia. Recent years have taught us that humankind is bent on repeating history.
It is an evil world. Ours is a beautiful world with much to love and enjoy, and yet from the human heart spawns tremendous wickedness. It is astonishing that God should show such patience and grace.
Here is what my Bible reading was this morning, and frankly it is not what we deserve and it cuts against even how my own society often thinks of the human body, and yet it is profoundly good and light and life. In death and life, while enjoying the warmth of the sun or sitting in the darkest place, here is God’s promise,
“Listen, I am telling you a mystery: We will not all fall asleep, but we will all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we will be changed. For this corruptible body must be clothed with incorruptibility, and this mortal body must be clothed with immortality. When this corruptible body is clothed with incorruptibility, and this mortal body is clothed with immortality, then the saying that is written will take place:
Death has been swallowed up in victory.
Where, death, is your victory? Where, death, is your sting?
The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law. 57 But thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ!” (1 Corinthians 15:51-57)
Neil DeGrasse Tyson can’t fathom why Christian athletes don’t blame God when they lose a final, even a Super Bowl. The famous astrophysicist from television told his 14 million followers,
“Curious that talented athletes frequently credit God when they win, but we rarely see them blame God when they lose.”
I’m assuming he’s reacting to a tweet from Kanas City’s star quarterback, Patrick Mahomes, following their loss to Philadelphia in Super Bowl LIX,
“Appreciate all the love and support from #ChiefsKingdom
I let y’all down today. I’ll always continue to work and try and learn and be better for it.
Want to give thanks to God for every opportunity he has given me.
We will be back.”
The astrophysicist can’t explain why the footballer would thank God even in a defeat as brutal as the one the Chiefs received yesterday.
I can’t speak for Patrick Mahomes or for the numerous players from both the Chiefs and Eagles who are known for publicly identifying as Christians, but let me offer 3 reasons why Christians are able to give thanks to God whether they come home with a trophy or not.
Christians have an identity more secure and satisfying than sporting glory.
To be a professional athlete requires astonishing levels of not only natural ability but determination and sacrifice. Athletes don’t win Olympic gold or the Super Bowl without years of dedication, self-control and pain. It’s little wonder that players break down in tears when they fall short of their goals. How can you say, thank you God when you lose?
The not-so-secret answer was laid out in the days leading up to the Super Bowl when several Chief and Eagles players shared their testimonies,
Carson Wentz said, “At the end of the day, He’s the only way. He’s the truth and the life,”
Rick Lovato, What He did for our sins, is something that I will always be in debt of.”
“I keep the focus on making my identity outside of sport – I do sport, but it’s not who I am. That’s been the breakthrough for me – realising that my performance does not determine my identity. Once you do that, you realise that it doesn’t matter whether you win the Olympics or come last, you’re still the same person.”
It’s about perspective. In other words, Jesus Christ provides a ballast and hope that outweighs even winning a Super Bowl.
It’s a shallow religion that can only accept successes. Do we only want to worship a God who is in control when we win and not when life turns difficult? We all need to ground our hopes and selves in a reality that can outlast a sporting match and that can deliver in the darkest moments.
I’m reminded of Australian Olympian medallist, Nicola McDermott who explained in an interview last year,
“I keep the focus on making my identity outside of sport – I do sport, but it’s not who I am. That’s been the breakthrough for me – realising that my performance does not determine my identity. Once you do that, you realise that it doesn’t matter whether you win the Olympics or come last, you’re still the same person.”
It’s almost as though Neil DeGrasse Tyson has adopted a ‘prosperity’ version of Christianity, which claims that faith in Jesus leads to material prosperity and worldly gain, like Midas’s touch. That’s not Christianity, that’s a serpentine fallacy.
This ‘Christ given identity’ not only fits professional athletes but translates into the norms of life for all Christians. Our identity runs deeper than the state of work, relationships and health. We are not defined by VCE marks or job promotion, marital status or the suburb where we live. There is a profound joy that cannot be shaken by success and failure. The Apostle Paul explains it in this remarkable way,
”No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us. For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers,neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
2. The Eric Liddell approach.
It’s not that Christian athletes are less committed and passionate about their sport. In following Jesus, there is an added dimension. I like to call it the Eric Liddell approach. Eric Liddell (of Chariots of Fire fame) won the 400m track gold medal at the 1924 Paris Olympic Games. Liddell said of running,
“God made me fast. And when I run, I feel His pleasure.”
It is one thing to compete for yourself, it is an ever great good to compete for your teammate, club and supporters. To enjoy God and glorify him in your athleticism is another step up. It’s not an either-or proposition, but both/and, and the addition of glorifying God elevates the privilege and joy in running, throwing, kicking and whatever sport it is.
Noah Gray from the Chiefs said during the week, “Regardless of where you’re at in your life, the fact that God came down and took on flesh and died for our sins, that’s the biggest thing I take away and hold near and dear to my heart every day when I go and make decisions for my family and play football. If God can do that, I can go out there and try to be the best I possibly can in glorifying Him in everything.”
3. What matters most
Eric Liddell won his Olympic gold medal and then became a missionary to China where he died in a Japanese concentration camp during the Second World War. He joyfully laid aside Olympic glory for a crown of righteousness.
Christian faith gives perspective for what is good and what is ultimate, what is temporary and what is eternal. And that gives us permission to fail without being crushed, to lose without life falling apart.
Geelong AFL player, Ollie Dempsey who won the Rising Star award last season, was interviewed by the AFL last week about his football and faith. Well done AFL for having some guts to give a footballer the opportunity to talk about Jesus
Dempsey was open and vulnerable as he shared his personal shortcomings. He left home at 18 to move city and become a professional footballer. He talked about his fears in sharing his faith with his teammates and of his friendship with the great Gary Ablett Jnr who has encouraged him to keep walking with Jesus.
Dempsey shared,
“I put my favourite bible verses on my wrist tape. It’s something I’ve done every game since my second year. Even say I’m having a tough game, I’ll think to myself ‘Trust in God, I’m here for a reason and it’s all part of His plan’. It helps me through the ups and downs of the game.”
“I truly believe that I’m here in the AFL for a purpose bigger than just playing footy and it’s to spread the goodness of Jesus. Especially with my story and only playing six games of school football and somehow getting drafted, which is still crazy to me, I try to give all glory to God for any of my achievements”.
“I still struggle with this and being public about it all because I don’t always live it. I’m never going to be one in someone’s face trying to convert them to Christianity, that’s just not me. But I feel especially this last year by just being myself, trying to be happy and loving, people can see God shining through me and that’s just how I try to approach life.”
For Dempsey, being a Christian doesn’t diminish his desire to excel and become a better athlete and help bring more success to Geelong, his trust in Jesus provides greater motivation and reason.
Do we not accept the Lord of times of winning and losing? The difference between the Christian and the non-Christian in sports is not winning or losing games, and neither is it in feeling elation or sadness. But it is in the fact that knowing your identity is not determined by such things and that the joy and hope you have far out ways the greatest of human triumph. Hence Christian thankfulness is a great antidote to pride and despair, to elation in winning and disappointment in losing.
Why would a Christian athlete blame God for a loss? Neil DeGrasse Tyson might have a grasp on the movement of stars, but he doesn’t seem to understand how a Christian can praise God in the midst of loss.
Christians to this day, sing and repeat Job’s refrain Job is a dude from the Bible who suffered the loss of property, wealth and his children. His friends came along side himself, assuming that he must be guilty of some great sin. How else can you explain his suffering? Job declared,
“Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
and naked I will depart.
The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away;
may the name of the Lord be praised.”
This isn’t nasty fatalism or foolishness, but a depth of knowledge that God remains sovereign and he can be trusted in all life situations.
Last Sunday as a Church, we looked at these words of Jesus from John’s Gospel, words Jesus spoke immediately following Judas’s leaving to betray him, and only hours before he was crucified,
‘Now the Son of Man is glorified and God is glorified in him.If God is glorified in him, God will glorify the Son in himself, and will glorify him at once’.
Jesus didn’t define betrayal as failure but understood God is strong enough to not only out manoeuvre but to use betrayal and Jesus’ crucifixion for real glory. Death wasn’t Jesus failing, it was the means by which he would bring forgiveness.
I wonder if Neil DeGrasse Tyson sees the cross of Jesus as foolish and weak and a failure? Or perhaps look at it from Jesus’ perspective and see how the cross served as glory? You see, all Christian faith comes back to understanding the cross and grasping that Jesus’ death (as evil and shocking as it was) served to bring about monumental good, even eternal life. No wonder those NFL players are happy to love their footy and also praise Jesus.
“The Lord our God is merciful and forgiving, even though we have rebelled against him;” (Daniel 9:9)
100 notable Australians have written a letter to Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, calling for a federal inquiry into kids gender therapy. The list of signatories includes senior medical professionals, academics, and politicians including former Prime Minister Tony Abbott and former Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson. Lest we think this is a partisan statement, the names attached to the letter belong across the political spectrum.
I commend the letter to the Prime Minister, and indeed, to Victoria’s Premier Jacinta Allan.
This letter has been written off the back of growing evidence that vulnerable children are being led to permanent life-altering procedures without sufficient medical or ethical reasoning. Earlier this week, the Queensland Government was forced to act and pause transitioning procedures on minors when a hospital was allegedly caught performing dangerous procedures on children as young as 12, without the consent of parents. Also this week in the United States, President Trump signed an executive order, stopping Federal support for the gender transitioning of young people.
These actions are but the latest of a growing number of Governments around the world who have pulled the plug on radical gender interventions. Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden, France and New Zealand are among the countries who are taking action to ban, or at least pause, medical intervention on children suffering from gender dysphoria.
It took the bravery of young people in Great Britain to sound the alarm, young adults who at the time were children and subjected to the transitioning movement in the UK health system. The result was the CASS review (2024). The doors were blown open and the UK Government was forced to shut down the Tavistock Clinic and hit the emergency button to stop pumping children with hormones, chemicals and even surgical procedures. Despite the preaching by gender progressives, evidence is scant (if not fabricated) that children are better off having body parts amputated or chemicals injected into their bodies.
The days of using children in the service of gender theories are numbered. I believe this is one of the great evils of our time, for it cuts against the very nature of being human, and being male and female. It is to our shame that our society ever encouraged such ideas. Governments may wait until they are swamped with legal action or they can take the moral ground and take action now.
Obviously, there are all kinds of important issues here. The note that I wish to sound in this particular article is one of mercy. Mercy is a word that has been used a lot over the past week in relation to gender and children. It is a word that can be used and misused, applied and misapplied, and so in light of the letter to Australia’s Prime Minister, I would like to add a word of mercy.
The question of gender fluidity and children changing genders is often framed around acceptance and intolerance, affirmation or bigotry. Unfortunately, this kind of binary approach is unhelpful and is often untrue. It isn’t hatred to affirm biology and to believe that biology determines gender. Neither is it intolerance to appreciate that there are children (and some adults) who struggle to accept their physical bodies and the gender that comes with that. Words matter.
We need to differentiate between these children who deserve our love and care, and those who promote the ideology of gender fluidity and who are responsible for inflicting lifelong damage onto these children.
For example, when Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde recently called for mercy and compassion, she wasn’t asking Americans to save children from gender therapy. She was calling on President Trump to affirm their gender confusion and enable the very social and medical processes that we know to be unethical and harmful. The Bishop may have used some of Jesus’ language but her meaning is a world apart from the kind of mercy Jesus offers and that we all need. We may or may not approve of President Trump and much of his character and rhetoric, but his latest executive order is sensible. As the letter to the Prime Minister demonstrates, the concerns are not left or right, but moral and medical.
I realise that there are some who have caste doubts over this interpretation of Budde’s views. But I am simply accepting her teaching. Words have meaning. The Bishop of Washington DC has expressed her views on sexuality and gender on other occasions, and lest she has experienced a Damascus road repentance in the last few weeks, her meaning in the sermon corresponds to her regular teachings.
The notion of Divine mercy is too good and holy for us to revise or use in the service of political progressivism (and political conservatism).
Mercy is showing kindness. Mercy is not telling children lies or encouraging them to believe in mistaken identities and shuffling them off to a hospital for puberty blockers and even castration. As the letter to the Prime Minister intimates, there are better ways.
Mercy involves patience and love, and hope. Mercy doesn’t deny reality or brush aside physical or psychological anxieties but learns to sit and journey with someone until the light of day.
As a Christian, mercy takes a Christ-like shape. I think of the episode when Jesus met a Samaritan woman (John ch.4). As far as society was concerned, this particular woman had 3 strikes against her name and so ostracising her was considered the right thing to do: She was a a woman, she was a Samaritan, and she had sexually broken past. Jesus didn’t follow those rules of engagement. Jesus didn’t reject her, he showed compassion. He engaged in conversation with her. He didn’t ignore or pretend that her sexual history was unimportant, but rather, Jesus went further and showed mercy. Mercy didn’t involve encouraging her to pursue sexual sin or impropriety. He revealed to her the hope of Israel and through this offered her living water that would quench her thirst forever.
Churches who choose to mimic the message by Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde are more damnable than any other group in society, for they claim to speak in the name of God and offer faux mercy.
Churches, if your community is not already a safe place of truth and kindness, goodness and mercy, you are not ready to receive the growing number of young Australians who need to know of the hope of the gospel. If your view of mercy means accepting the culture’s latest gender theory, then your church is not ready to care for those who experience trauma and who are struggling with their body, mind and soul.
What did the Apostle Paul say,
“Therefore, I urge you, brothers and sisters, in view of God’s mercy, to offer your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and pleasing to God—this is your true and proper worship.”
Prime Minister please listen to the concerns outlined in the letter. And Churches, learn mercy from Christ and not from our culture’s talking points.
As Jesus said, ‘go and learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.’
Update: January 31st, 1:45pm, Federal Health Minister Mark Butler has ordered a “comprehensive review” into gender therapy practices for children in Australia. This is a good step. Let’s pray that it is indeed a ‘comprehensive review’. I will add, that until such review is complete, all such ‘therapies’ and practices should be paused, to avoid causing further harm to countless children
Joe Rogan’s interview with Wes Huff has reached millions of views. As a (now former) non-Joe Rogan fan, I wanna say that it is well worth the 3 hours, not least for Rogan’s masterful conversational style.
Until last week Wesley Huff was little known outside the icy lands of Canada. Huff is an academic and Christian apologist who is currently undertaking PhD studies in the New Testament field. His field of expertise relates to ancient texts, in particular studying ancient New Testament manuscripts. In case you’re thinking that this is the making of a somewhat dry and brief Rogan episode, think again.
If you’re keen, here is the link to the interview. My interest here is not to regurgitate the entire 3 hours or comment on every online response. I’m interested in one salient point that came out during the interview and which has stirred the waters since.
During the interview, Wes made a series of assertions about Jesus in quick succession,
“You have this Jewish itinerant guy who is walking around Roman occupied first century Judea, he is making some pretty audacious claims; he claims to be God himself and then he predicts his own death and resurrection…’
It’s the line about Jesus ‘audaciously going around claiming to be God Himself’ that has grabbed attention and has created something of a stir. Isn’t it fascinating how Jesus’ identity remains a hot topic today as it was during his lifetime? No matter how many elements of culture try to tame Jesus, he continues to surprise and subvert and reignite interest.
Alex O’Connor is a popular YouTube influencer with more than 1 million followers on his ‘CosmicSkeptic’ Channel. He put together a response to the Rogan interview and has tried to dissect and rebut some of Huff’s statements. Gavin Ortlund has done a fine job responding to O’Connor’s critique. I want to speak to this one particular objection O’Connor made to Wed Huff, and that is, Jesus claimed to be God,
“[Jesus] was audaciously going around claiming to be God Himself. I don’t think that’s true. Nowhere in Mark, Matthew, or Luke does Jesus actually claim to be God in His own words. At best it’s just in John’s Gospel that divine claims begin to appear.”
O’Connor’s suggestion is big news, if true. If he’s right, it undercuts 2000 years of Christianity and in all probability, destroys Christianity’s credibility. Of course, his claim isn’t new. I’d be surprised if you haven’t heard people making similar conclusions whether in your own education or among friends. In 2015, Australia’s Phillip Adams interviewed Frederic Raphael where Raphael threw out as though it was vernacular truth, ‘the Jews who would not accept that Jesus was the Son of God, nor of course did Jesus’.
Who is right, O’Connor or Huff? In our cyber connected world that’s deluged with opinions and comments and points of view, finding the truth can be tricky. Sometimes it feels as though the truth has been locked in a vault and cast into a blackhole somewhere past Uranus and well beyond our scope.
And the question of Jesus’ Divinity is about as big a question as they come. It is not, however, one of the questions where we are left to ruminate and wonder and remain in the dark. We can go to the sources and investigate for ourselves (which is one of Huff’s main theses). Scholarship and academia is useful and insightful (can be), but one of the qualities of the Bible is that it is an every person’s book. Anyone can read and grapple with it for themselves. When it comes to the question, ‘Did Jesus claim to be God’?, open a Bible and find out.
Is it the case that Jesus claimed to be God? The question, is Jesus God?, is slightly different from the former one, but they are nonetheless intimately connected.
Obviously, this is a huge topic and one could write a 27-volume tome exploring it, but I suspect few would read it (including myself). Plus, I’m currently on holidays and so brevity is the way to go. What I wish to do here is note a few places that indicate not only Jesus’ Divinity, but also demonstrate that Jesus understood himself to be God the Son.
In the below list of Jesus quotations, I am including ones from John’s Gospel, because John, like the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) belongs to the New Testament Canon. O Connor wants John excluded from the discussion (presumably because he thinks John is a 2nd-century document, a view which scholarship widely discounts today). Imagine a detective explaining to the court, that we have discarded this this evidence because it doesn’t fit with the conclusions we had already made!
Each Gospel, including each of the synoptic gospels, offer different perspectives and material and emphases, but none contradict the other others, but rather they complement one another. The fact that there are a couple of details that leave scholars scratching their heads to this day, says more about our own limitations than it does about the Bible texts where there is extraordinary coherence and synthesis.
Even if we take up O’Connor’s challenge and leave John’s Gospel aside, there is ample evidence that displays Jesus’ self awareness of being God. But given John’s place in the Canon, I will at times include Johannine references.
The clear but subtle awareness of Jesus’ Godness
Jesus’ ministry was not set in 21st-century Australia or America, as though he is answering our questions by using stories about the iPhone or analogies from cricket or Taylor Swift. Jesus was a first-century Jew. He lived in a Roman occupied region and who’s ideas, words, and actions were consciously steeped in and fulfilling Old Testament themes and promises. That means, that when Jesus talks about himself, he regularly deferred to the Jewish Scriptures and spoke in those categories. One of the implications of this is that as we understand the meaning of Old Testament names and images for God and we see Jesus applying them to himself, we begin to see a picture of the One who says he is God.
Take for example, the title, Shepherd. Shepherd has connotations with King David and therefore Messianic expectations, but in places like Ezekiel ch.34, God equates himself to shepherd who will come, deliver, protect and provide for his people,
“‘For this is what the Sovereign Lord says: I myself will search for my sheep and look after them. 12 As a shepherd looks after his scattered flock when he is with them, so will I look after my sheep. I will rescue them from all the places where they were scattered on a day of clouds and darkness. 13 I will bring them out from the nations and gather them from the countries, and I will bring them into their own land. I will pasture them on the mountains of Israel, in the ravines and in all the settlements in the land. 14 I will tend them in a good pasture, and the mountain heights of Israel will be their grazing land. There they will lie down in good grazing land, and there they will feed in a rich pasture on the mountains of Israel. 15 I myself will tend my sheep and have them lie down, declares the Sovereign Lord. 16 I will search for the lost and bring back the strays. I will bind up the injured and strengthen the weak, but the sleek and the strong I will destroy. I will shepherd the flock with justice.”
Famously in John 10, Jesus declares, ‘I am the Good Shepherd’. Not only does Jesus speak the unspeakable name of God, he attributes the name to himself (ἐγώ εἰμι). Jesus sums up his person as the God who is the Good Shepherd. For those who wish to keep John’s Gospel to the side for this debate, it’s not only John’s Gospel that makes the connection between Jesus, God and Shepherd. The Synoptics also do this (cf Matt 2:6; Mark 6:34). In Matthew, Jesus explains his own mission as coming to find the ‘lost sheep of Israel’ (Matt 15:24). Now, is this an explicit claim of personal Divinity? When read in its context, Jesus certainly seems to be making the case.
Another motif that comes from the lips of Jesus is that of Divine forgiveness. He not only taught that God forgives sins, he did so. When Jesus forgave sins, both his interlocutors and adversaries understood the Divine authority Jesus supposed behind his words,
“Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Luke 5:21). It is this charge of blasphemy against Jesus that sets the trajectory of opposition toward Jesus and which ultimately leads to his crucifixion.
The themes of Shepherd and forgiveness are but 2 of many that are taken up by Jesus to ascribe and describe himself and his ministry and mission. There is subtleness in much of Jesus’ language and today’s readers may not pick up the connections if we’re unfamiliar with the Old Testament, but one thing is clear, Jesus’ enemies got the message, and with time Jesus own disciples and friends also understood: Jesus is saying that he’s God.
Jesus’ self revelation as God is not restricted to his words, but also to his life and deeds. Whether it is controlling a storm at sea or raising the Lazarus from the dead or throwing out demons and evil spirits, his life repeatedly signals more than a man of great kindness and love and strength, but one who is excising Divine authority and purpose.
Jesus’ words
“If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written: “‘He will command his angels concerning you, and they will lift you up in their hands, so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.” Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’” (Matthew 4:6-7)
‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.” (Matthew 22:32)
“It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life”. (John 6:45-47)
“Very truly I tell you, a time is coming and has now come when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God and those who hear will live”. (John 5:25)
“Very truly I tell you,” Jesus answered, “before Abraham was born, I am!” (John 8:58)
Jesus replied, “If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. (John 8:54)
“I and the Father are one” (John 10:30)
“Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.” (John 10:36-38)
“How can you say, ‘Show us the Father’? Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work” (John 14:9b-10)
The many ‘I AM’ sayings of Jesus in John’s Gospel are less about English grammar and is the holy name of Israel’s God, revealed to Moses at the burning bush. The religious intelligentsia rightly understood Jesus’ use of the phrase as calling himself the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.
In addition, Jesus’ most frequently used title was ‘Son of Man. While it’s meaning was somewhat enigmatic, Jesus spoke and acted in ways that accorded with the Old Testament and therefore it is difficult to conclude that Jesus viewed the title, ‘Son of Man’, in a way that differed from its use in Daniel chapter 7, where the ‘Son of Man’ is described as one who is given the authority and power of God, and is worshiped accordingly.
What about the Great Commission in Matthew 28:16-20? Here are told that 11 disciples (remember Judas Iscariot had killed himself) are meeting with the resurrected Jesus and worshipping him as God. Like a document that doesn’t whitewash history, Matthew notes that some still doubted, but generally speaking, the penny has dropped and the disciples are worshipping Jesus as God. Does Jesus reject this homage? Instead, he claims an authority that only God has and he reveals the One God (notice how Jesus says, ‘the name’ singular) who is the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.
“Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
This is a crystal clear example of Jesus claiming to be God and accepting worship as God.
Words from others that Jesus did not repudiate
“The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.” ((Matthew 4:3)
“What do you want with us, Son of God?” they shouted. “Have you come here to torture us before the appointed time?” (Matthew 8:29)
“Then those who were in the boat worshiped him, saying, “Truly you are the Son of God.” (Matthew 14:33)
“Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.” (Matthew 16:16)
“Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others asked, “How can a sinner perform such signs?” So they were divided. Then they turned again to the blind man, “What have you to say about him? It was your eyes he opened.” (John 9:16-17)
“When Jesus saw their faith, he said, “Friend, your sins are forgiven.” The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, “Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?” (Luke 5:20-21)
“Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?” “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.” (John 10:31-33)
“Yes, Lord,” she replied, “I believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, who is to come into the world.” (John 11:27)
“Thomas said to him, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28)
The reason for Jesus’ crucifixion
Jesus wasn’t crucified because he was leading a rebellion or not being nice to his neighbours. Authorities wanted Jesus dead because he claimed to be God.
“For this reason they tried all the more to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God”. (John 5:18)
“The Jewish leaders insisted, “We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God.” (John 19:7)
You can’t ignore the rest of the New Testament
Alex O’Connor suggests that we leave John’s Gospel aside and he doesn’t even entertain what the rest of the New Testament shows us about Jesus’ identity. In this, he’s mimicking Red Letter Christians who surmise that Jesus’ words are the only ones we need to take seriously, as opposed to other bible words and writers. That fails to read the New Testament on its own terms and it fails to take Jesus’ own words seriously
Not only does Jesus insist that all Scripture is about him and fulfilled in him, he spells out to his disciples that under the direction of the Holy Spirit they will teach and provide what we call today the ‘Apostolic testimony’, which is the foundation of Christian truth and life today. Jesus won’t let us think that the disciples’ words are somehow less true or reliable than his. Rather, their words are his words. What Peter, John, and later Paul would write to the churches can be trusted. Their theology of God is Jesus’. Their insistence on both the humanity and the Deity of Christ is perfectly in sync with Jesus.
“the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you. (John 14:26)
“When the Advocate comes, whom I will send to you from the Father—the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father—he will testify about me. 27 And you also must testify, for you have been with me from the beginning. (John 15:26-27)
To summarise the evidence:
On numerous occasions Jesus indicated that he is God’s Son.
Jesus’ opponents believed that Jesus was claiming to be God, and for the said reason they had him killed.
Many people believed that Jesus was God and Jesus did not correct them
Jesus’ life, character, works, miracles, death and resurrection are unique in the entire history of the world, and each adds weight to his claim of Divinity, not detracts.
The first Christians, many of whom were eye-witnesses to the life of Jesus and others were at one time opponents, were prepared to suffer imprisonment and even death for the confession, Jesus is Lord.
Conclusion
The evidence weighs heavily against Alex O Connor and falls in agreement with Wesley Huff. Jesus made pretty audacious claims, claiming to be God.
Dripping from this key question of whether Jesus is God, there are all kinds of topics and issues relating to the most momentous things. What kind of God is he? What does it mean for the world if Jesus is God? What does it say about the world? What does this say about me?”
The question of Jesus’ Divinity is more than an interesting topic of conversation among friends or for a podcast. It is too big and important to remain stuck in the books of academics and theologians and philosophers. This world could not contain the message of Jesus Christ in the first century, neither can it today. It demands our attention. Let me finish with the question Jesus once asked of Peter, ‘Who do you say I am?”
‘It’s biblical’. The disaster is of ‘biblical proportions.’
The Age newspaper ran this headline to describe the terrifying fires in Los Angeles: ‘It was biblical.’
It’s fascinating to see how quick we are to turn to and lean upon biblical language and imagery when trying to make sense of events in front of us. This isn’t specifically a Christian trait, it is a cultural one. In fact, it is a near-universal tone for people grasping for description and explanation of what has befallen them.
The fires in and around Los Angeles are truly epic and terrible. As a Melbournian, I am familiar with fire. Every summer breeds conditions that can be whipped into a firestorm across our hills and outer suburbs within a very short period of time. Though we live across the Pacific Ocean, we are watching with understanding and trepidation for our American cousins.
The observation that I wish to explore for a few moments here is the regularity in which the idiom, ‘biblical’ is used to describe events of monumental significance, and most commonly, those that are tragic in nature. It’s not only the use of ‘biblical’ in the vernacular but our almost subconscious reliance upon the Bible in order to make sense of life’s events. The Bible has so influenced our epistemology and morality and spirituality, that we defer to its words and ideas, often without realising or without belief.
What does it mean to be ‘biblical’?
On one level, it makes sense that we use the word, ‘biblical’ to describe overwhelming tragic events. After all, the Bible contains a large volume of events with awesome power and of cosmic consequence. Whether it is the Noahic Flood, the Plagues on Egypt, or the destruction of nations and humbling of kingdoms, the Bible depicts massive occasions and crises.
However, one of the mistakes we can fall into is assuming the Bible’s presentation of disaster as simplistic. This is far from the case. Comprehending the whys and what’s of grim events isn’t as easy as dividing the world into good and bad people, or equating blessing with moral people and suffering with sinful people. This is one reason for engaging seriously with the Bible text rather than relying on easy sloganeering. Learn our theology less from Dante and more from the Bible, and when we do we discover that the Holy Scriptures presentation is far more fearful and freeing, awesome, overwhelming and also consoling.
Let me show you. Take, for example, these five elements that are traced throughout the Bible’s storyline and which intersect and develop as we move from Genesis to Malachi and from Matthew to Revelation. Rather than picking and choosing or making a bland pot of tea, there is more to this ‘biblical’ than we may first realise.
First, disasters, whether ‘natural’ or manmade, signal to us that the world is not okay. The world in which we live, work, and play is amazing and replete with good things, and yet hardship and suffering meet us at every intersection. This is not a utopian world. The greatest minds and technologies still cannot control the forces of nature. We cannot ever curb human instincts toward evil, let alone human error. Indeed, we often use our imaginations and advancements to continue ill, rather than to cure. In this, the Bible is an honest story. The Bible is real to life. The Scriptures don’t ignore the heights of human joy and love and life, nor the greatest ignominy and ignorance.
The Bible isn’t a fictitious fable where everything ends well and the Princess rides off with the pony. The Bible exposes the cruelty of loss, the horror of death, and the thousand ways life is upended.
Second, today’s disasters are prelude to a day of Divine judgment. The presence of floods, fires, and disease are not moot experiences, simply to be endured.
As C.S Lewis famously wrote, “God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is his megaphone to rouse a deaf world”
In his famous ‘apocalyptic’ sermon, Jesus likens both natural and human-made disasters to a pregnant woman entering labour,
“Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are the beginning of birth pains.” (Matthew 24:5-8)
In other words, not only is tragedy and pain signalling a world that is in turmoil, but these preempt, like a siren or rolling thunder, that a cataclysmic event is approaching. Jesus is saying, that as awful as these things are, they are reminders that we will all one day meet the God who is a consuming fire, holy and awesome.
Third, tragedy strikes everyone. We ought to step with extreme caution as we try to understand events in our lives and in those of other people. It is too easy, and erroneous, to suppose the tragedy only strikes the ‘sinner’ and blessing for the ‘righteous. Don’t be like Job’s friends!
In Los Angeles this week, the poor and wealthy alike, Hollywood stars and house cleaners, have shared the same loss. I know of Christians who have lost homes and Church buildings that become ruin and ash.
There are occasions in the Bible narrative where disaster falls on particular people as Divine judgment for specific sins. Many of the most serious words and actions are directed by God on his own people because of their continued evil and unrepentance. Moreover, the biblical testimony describes the world in which we live as fallen and corrupted, and all experience the moment. On one occasion Jesus gave an explanation of tragedy which should caution all before attributing specific Divine judgment for particular events in our time.
On one occasion when Jesus pushed back on the view that tragedy is necessarily linked to some specific horrible deed lurking in your past. Jesus mentions to local events, one was a massacre and the other a building collapse, and he used both incidents to rebuff the idea that suffering equals guilt,
Jesus answered, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them—do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? 5 I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” (Luke 13:2-5)
Fourth, we long for Divine intervention and grace. Why do we pray? When we lose control and when hope dissipates why is prayer the near universal default?
Jesus won’t have us believe that this is some evolutionary residue or chromosomal leftover from less developed times. Jesus (and therefore the Bible), won’t let us think that God is in any way less Sovereign today than in any moment of history. Rather, it is because God is God, and because he is a good God, that we can cry out to him, ‘Abba Father’.
Fifth, and perhaps most important of all, ‘biblical’ does not only denote terrible events, but also the wonderful and life giving.
Not all the ‘biblical’ is bad and disastrous – the truly biblical includes exquisite and extraordinary, grace and goodness. The pages of the Bible are filled with stories of immense love and of extravagant mercy and forgiveness. Even judgment is often met with redemption, and grief finds consolation. Above all, the most horrifying event of all history, the cross of Jesus Christ, also turns out to be the defining event that produces forgiveness, peace and new life.
The incarnation is big time ‘biblical’. That God the Son should come into our space and share our humanity and experience every gamut of human suffering. Jesus went further and grabbed hold of human sin and guilt and bore Divine punishment for us by his death on the cross.
This event of ‘biblical’ proportion is matched by his resurrection. The God Man who died and was laid in the tomb, was raised to real life on the third day: breathing, walking, physical and cognitive functioning life.
Within hours of the fires erupting in Los Angeles, people were looking for explanations and for people to blame. Indeed, investigations and enquiries will no doubt take place. Such things are important. Lessons need learning.
My point here is a simple one, equating events to ‘biblical’ isn’t a bad starting place. Most of us will do this, and do so without knowing what is ‘biblical’. In 2025, believers, sceptics and investigators will each turn to the Bible to image, explain and interrupt the events in our world, both great and small. As we do, let’s not mythologise the Bible or reduce the Scriptures to monolithic meaning, but embrace the whole.
We won’t grasp the ‘why’ of every tragedy in this life and world; such wisdom is beyond our pay grade. What is remarkably Biblical is to realise that God entered human suffering in the most personal of ways. Jesus’ life was marked by suffering. He walked alongside the sick and the destitute. He loved the poor and the outcast. His crucifixion entailed every manner of pain and violence, such that he satisfied the right wrath of God. He has even extinguished the power of death so that we might share ultimately in his life forever.
I was saddened to learn last night that Michael Leunig has died at the age of 79. It’s as though a little part of Australia has died with him.
Leunig’s family announced his death with these befitting words,
“The pen has run dry, its ink no longer flowing – yet Mr Curly and his ducks will remain etched in our hearts, cherished and eternal.”
25 years ago, Susan and I were enjoying dinner at a friend’s home when I saw it hanging on the wall above the dining table. It was a drawing of a man sitting at a grand piano. The man had a particularly large rounded nose, which I had seen before. There was little colour on the canvas. Like Matisse, the artist conveyed all he needed with two or was it perhaps three tones.
The etching was simple and clean, almost like a cartoon. It conveyed something of the simple pleasures accompanying the piano. As someone who had until that time spent virtually his entire entirety life learning to play this magisterial instrument, I was immediately drawn to his work by Michael Leunig; it made sense to me.
Leunig’s cartoons, drawings and paintings communicate life and provoke us to question and consider the Divine design behind the canvas.
Life is beautiful. Whether it’s the inquisitive duck or his vibrant trees or musicians, Leunig painted a beautiful life. Life is precious and is a wondrous gift. Acknowledging God who gives life, is both an obligation and a joy.
Imagine their existing a masterful painting on the wall at home and never stopping to gaze upon it, to understand and enjoy it. How often do we walk about and consume and enjoy the world without stopping to give thanks to the one who designed and enables us to live and participate?
Leunig was renowned for his use of subtle humour to elucidate critical thinking and moral evaluation. It reminds me a little of Jesus who added humorous, almost silly liners while teaching things of great import,
“You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel”
“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
One of Leunig’s better-known drawings is this betrayal of Jesus’s crucifixion. In a mood faithful to the original crowd who mocked Jesus on the cross, Leunig paints a soldier calling out,
“Look at that? Brilliant! You kill the leader and you nip the whole movement in the bud”.
The joke is on us. The cross makes us fools. The cross turns our power into ineptitude. Indeed, the joke is on us, filled with intellectual hubris and moral certainty, as we turn down the only redemption available.
Leunig’s work pushes us to say ‘no’ to ambivalence. It is a gentle and humorous rebuke toward an Australian culture that even today wishes to paint over the most pivotal moment in history.
I know next to nothing about Leunig’s personal life. Whether in concert or in contradiction, his work conveyed a bright message that is being overshadowed by a compounding grey.
Today Michael Leunig no longer needs his paintbrush, for he gets to see his Creator, the One who crafted with his word every colour and shape and mountain range, every ocean and even the stars. And the pinnacle of his creativity, making us, his image bearers.
Again life is beautiful. And life is too easily cut short even at 79 years of age. Life ebbs away, and the blotch of tragedy, sadness, and yes also, evil marks every home. How much do we need a story where such things are overcome.
MurrayCampbell.net 