The Apocalypse is coming

The Apocalypse is coming and we are not ready.

I woke up last night (Susan says I have old man sleeping syndrome); I noticed Stephen McAlpine was writing about the great toilet paper crisis, a tornado was hitting Nashville, and then without warning our street suddenly had a blackout.

Morning finally came, and while our power had returned, the toilet paper crisis had worsened, and a real tragedy had unfolded in Nashville.

UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_127b

Firstly, I just want to say to all the panic buyers around Australia, thanks for nothing. Quite literally, nothing! I had tried to convince Susan that while there was no problem with the supply of toilet paper, people don’t always react with good measure. Thank you media for ramping up the scare levels. I heard this morning that one of the country’s major supermarket chains has begun rationing its toilet paper supplies thanks to those Aussies who couldn’t hold on for a little. While I sit around and hold on for the foreseeable future, let me share some thoughts about the Apocalypse which I was preaching last Sunday at church.

Talk about the end of the world was once associated with religious mania, but today throngs of irreligious people have amped up the chorus, ‘the end is nigh’, while others are following on social media, quietly pondering the possibility.

I’ve already responded to a piece by Geoff Dawson on the ABC, where he argues that perhaps humankind will become extinct and it doesn’t really matter because people are not special.  Dawson may be following the logic of his own Zen Buddhism, which sounds almost identical to atheistic naturalism, but most of us don’t buy it. People do matter. We are not the same as animals. Prospects of mass eradication of human beings trouble us because surely we have inherent and great worth.

Then we have our Climate Change alarmists who are going around and warning us that the world only has 10, 12 or 20 years remaining on the clock.  Before we roll our eyes at this new era of apocalyptic mania, I  can understand people being swept up rhetoric and tales of disaster. Indeed, for those who have survived personal trauma, such concerns are not merely hypothetical.

Global warming isn’t a phantom, Australia has just experienced a frightful bushfire season, and there are geopolitical uncertainties, and now, of course, there is the potential global pandemic with the Corona Virus.

Instead of thinking that maybe Hollywood was right, with its constant stream of disaster movies, there is another word that’s worth consideration.

Matthew ch.24 records the famous ‘Apocalyptic’ sermon of Jesus. You can listen to my exposition of Matthew ch.24 on the Mentone Baptist website. For now, I want to make note of four salient points from Jesus’ discourse on the end of the world.

Firstly, Jesus is describing how life in the world will be.

Jesus isn’t giving us a linear description of history, but a Divine interpretation of history and what we ought to expect in the world before the real and physical return of the creator King. There are 3 characteristics that mark this age.

One, there are global catastrophes and uncertainties,

 You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. 7 Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places. 8 All these are the beginning of birth pains. (vv.6-7)

When we see a disaster, it makes us pause and ponder. When the sky darkens and the thunder rolls, we often ask, what of the end? These things are not the end but serve as reminders that the world has not yet finished.

Second, there are attacks on the Church, from outside and from within. Jesus speaks of persecution, false prophets, and apostasy.

 “Then you will be handed over to be persecuted and put to death, and you will be hated by all nations because of me. 10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. 

Again, we are not required to read these verses as though Jesus is describing a not yet time in the future or as though there will necessarily be an escalation of these things prior to the coming of Christ. Rather, throughout this age Churches will experience this trifecta.

Thirdly, world evangelisation will take place. The good news of Jesus will be preached and reach every nation, and people from every tongue and tribe will respond and believe Jesus is Lord.

 “And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.” (v.14)

 

Second, we are not the first generation to face significant crises.

Last month I wrote an article criticising legislation that the Victorian Government is planning to introduce this year.  Thousands of people were reading, with hundreds and hundreds of comments made on social media. One of the more popular responses came from Christians who said things like, “this proves Jesus is coming soon….this is a sign of the end times….the anti-Christ has appeared in Melbourne…”

This reminded me that not only do we let our imaginations disconnect from the Bible, but also from history. I wanted to post an emoji with a screaming face, saying, “no, you have misunderstood me”! 

The problem with our apocalyptic manic Christians is that they always believe that ‘now’ are the last times, whereas yesterday wasn’t. If only we listened to our history classes at school. Ours is not the first generation to experience massive issues and seen terrible evil. The world has faced staggering mountains of trouble and uncertainty before. What of Jews living in Poland in 1939 as the Nazis destroyed everything in their wake? What of a Jewish family in hiding, as the SS hunted down neighbours and friends, either shooting them dead on the spot or throwing them onto a train bound for a death camp? Could things be any worse? Or what of those living 14th Century Europe as the Black Plague killed 1/3 of the continent’s population in Europe? What about the people fleeing from Genghis Khan who killed population after population across Asia and Europe? Could things be worse than that?

Most Aussies live in a luxurious bubble that few people in the world today enjoy, and even fewer in history.  There are however issues of major consequence facing us. At the very least, reading Jesus’ words should cause us to rethink our assumptions about our own security and dependencies in life.

Third, Jesus gives only one sign for his impending return

The word apocalyptic simply means, unveiling. It is to make known something that was previously unknown. The great unveiling concerns the time and manner in which the world will wrap up and the new creation revealed. As Jesus speaks to this question of the apocalypse, he explains that there is one sign, and that sign is his return.

“Then will appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven. And then all the peoples of the earth will mourn when they see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven, with power and great glory. 31 And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other. (vv.30-31)

This one sign will be visible, unavoidable and unmistakable. As Jesus adds, people will mourn. Why? Because we have spent our days denying and explaining away the reality of Christ. To those whom he describes as the elect, he says, stand firm (v.13) keep watch (v.4; v.42), don’t grow cold (v.12), don’t get sucked in by false teachers (vv.23-24).

Fourth, God is Sovereign

When will the final hour strike? No one knows the time or hour when Christ will return. Jesus tells us that only God the Father knows, and yet people press for more information and our imaginations get drawn into all manner of crazy theories and speculations.

42 “Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come. 

And Jesus also says,

“see to it that you are not alarmed.”

We should not be alarmed or surprised by events that take hold of people, nations, and the natural world. We can be appalled and grieve these sharp reminders of a world that is cursed and cannot redeem itself. Alarmism, however, isn’t befitting for the one who trusts in a God who is Sovereign.

Jesus’ apocalyptic sermon reinforces one of the Bible’s great themes, that events in our time are not beyond God’s knowledge or control. He isn’t reacting to events in the world as though he’s playing catch up. He knows what will happen tomorrow. He knows the outcome before the event. He is omniscient and omnipotent. Surely, this can be of great comfort? We may not know what lies tomorrow, whether it’s a virus or the weather, our work or exams. God has it all under his control and it is all pointing to the return of our Lord and Saviour.

The Apocalypse is coming and we are not ready.

And yet, here we are, religious and non-religious Australian alike are beginning to talk and to contemplate the potential. As talk about the apocalypse intensifies here are two simple things Christians can do: 1. Don’t contribute to the mania, 2. Take on board the encouragements and admonishments Jesus gives to the apocalyptic generation.

 

Epilogue:

Susan has just returned from the supermarket….there was no toilet paper!

Is the human race special?

If you’re looking for a pick me up message for today, I don’t recommend this contribution on the ABC website, The human race is not special. So why do we think we’re immune to mass extinction?

Geoff Dawson, whose bio says he is a psychologist and Zen Buddhist teacher, explains that human beings are no more important than any other species on the planet and that we should not over concern ourselves with our potential demise.

He asks the question, “Could we face a mass extinction of human beings in our lifetime?”

Dawson acknowledges that,

“To contemplate mass extinction is indeed a dark place to go to and a difficult conversation to have — even more difficult than global warming itself — because it is to think the unthinkable.”

However, don’t be fooled into thinking that this dark place holds any real meaning. Dawson explains that this conversation isn’t difficult because there is some overarching meaning to life or because human life is intrinsically more important than other life forms. Far from it, he would say. The extinction of people only warrants a problem for those who are facing termination.

“If one’s view of the world is based on science, we are not special, we were not placed here by a God to be the custodians of the Earth (and if we were, we have let the Almighty down big time!) and like all other species, we will have our place in the sun.

We will die out, and other, more adaptable, life forms will take our place.

The myth that we are somehow special and will continue to live forever as a dominant species is based on a deluded human-centric form of existential narcissism.

We may wring our hands and our hearts may ache at the rapid destruction of wildlife that is happening right now before our eyes, but we never seem to seriously consider that we may go the same way.”

What fantastic news! Don’t worry about the future because you are not special.  Our significance is no greater than that of any other species on the planet. Your impending death may not be a particularly pleasant experience for you or for the people who have affections for you, but in real terms, you’re just preparing the ground for future species. In the grand scheme of meaningless time, we are no more special than the dinosaur, the Dodo, or the Sabre-toothed Tiger.

Feeling better now? Probably not, but our Zen Buddhist friend insists that this is science. Although, why Dawson is bothered with science remains a mystery to me, because one of the basic assumptions of Zen Buddhism is that intellect and language of ethereal and true meaning can only be found by disengaging from both. 

Contradictions aside, what Dawson describes is not science, but naturalism, which is a way of interpreting scientific evidence based on the prior assumption that there is no God. In this way, both Zen Buddhism and naturalism share some common threads. The world has no overreaching design or telos, and one creature is not inherently more valuable than another. What makes human beings important is the evolutionary roll of the dice, that has resulted in cognitive, physical, and social strengths that enable us to control and use other species. Naturalism believes that people only sit at the top of the world because of power. All these conscious thoughts and beliefs about inherent dignity and greater worth than a tree or a frog are simply evolutionary mechanisms put in place to maintain the survival of our species. In fact, the very notion of human rights presupposes superiority over other things; perhaps this should be revisited!

By now, I’m sure you’re feeling the love. If you weren’t already questioning your self-worth, you probably are by now. But of course, this is the natural course when believing there is no God. Should we ignore this logic and feign belief in intrinsic human worth or do accept the world of Geoff Dawson? If the latter,  why bother addressing issues of Global warming or caring for endangered species? After all, it’s all a game of power and serving self-interest.

UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_16c7

I suspect most of us are uncomfortable with Dawson’s evaluation. We do not believe that goats and rats or even our pet dog are as important as other human beings. This raises an important question, why?  Why do most of us find Dawson’s comments not only unsatisfying but even grotesque?

Why should your thoughts or feelings or relationships matter any more than those of non-Homo Sapiens? Why should my desires and plans bear any more weight than that of non-sentient objects such as the rainforest or mountain or bushland?

Surely, it is because we know that while birds and fish and kangaroos are wonderful creatures and who add beauty and wonder to this world, we are not those things. Human beings are unique. We are physical beings, but also sentient and moral beings. We have a mind, soul, and spirit. There are vast cognitive differences between a human being and every other species on the planet, and to argue otherwise is stupid and anti-science. None other, despite their astonishing habits and works, come remotely close to the glory of man and woman.  But in our world of today, the obvious cannot be spoken, and the evidential is denied. People know that they are superior to animals and yet it is almost blasphemous to say so.

The answer humanity’s greater worth is not limited to this existential knowing, it is also grounded in a knowing that is more ancient than the universe itself. One might even say, that it is a Divine word that has created this knowledge of ourselves and of the world.

Rather than denigrating human beings, belief in God elevates our stature in a way that is both congruent to experience and that fills us with meaning and purpose. You were not just a clump of moving cells in flesh; you are made in the image of God. You are no mere animal with no more rights than an orangutan or cow or goldfish. At the same time, neither are we God. While I cannot speak for other religions, the Christian view pushes against both insignificance and self-absorption. Christianity repudiates the ultimate meaningless of naturalism and its companion, ultimate hopelessness, and Christianity also rebukes greed, consumerism, and abuse.

The answer to human misuse of the environment is not to relegate human beings to the place of monkeys, snakes, or the koala. Rather, it is to renew a proper understanding of what the Bible refers to as stewardship. And it is to recognise the reality of the incarnation, where at a direct point in history, God the Son took on flesh. John announced in his famous prologue,

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.” (John 1:1-5)

The fact that God became man, more than anything in history, says that every single person matters. They are not neglected by God or of no consequence to him. Indeed, God entered this space, becoming fully human without stripping his Divinity. The Gospel describes how this Jesus suffered the full gamut of human trials, and went through death that we might not be extinguished. Indeed, according to the Christian Bible extinction isn’t the end, but there is genuine hope of redemption and resurrection.

I appreciate that among my readers, you may or may not accept the Christian worldview. But my question, for now, is this – Which is better, the world of Geoff Dawson or the world explained by Jesus Christ? Should we suck it up and conclude that you and I are not special, and so treat each other accordingly? Or perhaps this Jesus has more to show us about both human worth and failing, and global trauma and reconciliation, than we perhaps realise.

Is the human race special? Are you special? Let me conclude by turning to these words of the Psalmist,

“You have searched me, Lord,

    and you know me.

You know when I sit and when I rise;

    you perceive my thoughts from afar.

You discern my going out and my lying down;

    you are familiar with all my ways.

Before a word is on my tongue

    you, Lord, know it completely.

You hem me in behind and before,

    and you lay your hand upon me.

Such knowledge is too wonderful for me,

    too lofty for me to attain….

 

…For you created my inmost being;

    you knit me together in my mother’s womb.

14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;

    your works are wonderful,

    I know that full well.

15 My frame was not hidden from you

    when I was made in the secret place,

    when I was woven together in the depths of the earth.

16 Your eyes saw my unformed body;

    all the days ordained for me were written in your book

    before one of them came to be.

17 How precious to me are your thoughts, God!

    How vast is the sum of them!

18 Were I to count them,

    they would outnumber the grains of sand—

    when I awake, I am still with you. (Psalm 139)

Australia is wrestling with Religious Freedom

The fight against the Religious Discrimination Bill is heating up with a submission from some of the nation’s powerful Unions and with a bank telling everyone to love their way or go away.

The Sydney Morning Herald is reporting that the Australian Council of Trade Unions and the Australian Industry Group have written a letter to Attorney General, Christian Porter, warning the Government about perceived flaws in the Bill.

I am not saying that the Bill is perfect and that improvements cannot be made. I personally wish there was no need for a Religious Discrimination Bill in Australia, but hardline secularists continue to threaten religious freedoms and raise the temperature against religious Australians such that a Bill has become important, if not necessary. 

So what are the Unions’ concerns? According to Dana McCauley, the primary issue relates to “a risk of harm to the staff and customers of Australian businesses”.

“Employers are concerned the provision will conflict with their obligation under workplace laws to provide safe environments free of bullying and harassment, risk damage to their reputations, harm productivity and make it harder to recruit and retain staff.”

The argument goes like this: this Bill will give religious people license to be mean and say horrible things to other workers and customers and employers won’t have the power to stop it. But is this the case?

Associate Professor, Neil Foster, has detailed that “The Bill does not authorise all religiously motived” acts, and second, the Bill does not create rights to new forms of horrible speech, but it does protect freedom of speech that operates against the background of already existing rights.

“The “right” to make offensive remarks, is a right which already exists as part of our long tradition of protecting free speech, even speech which we don’t like and which upsets people. That is why we need a right to free speech- none of us are tempted to censor speech we agree with!”

There has been a tidal wave of pressure to succumb to the new sexual code of conduct, and I can’t but help conclude that the ACTU and AI are just the latest to succumb. To be fair (relying on the SMH’s reporting), they are not against the Bill altogether, but those parts that they believe will undermine the employer.  Part of the issue with this tidal narrative is that religion is seen as a threat to business and as a threat to social cohesion. In reality, it can serve as a constructive partner. It is a little odd that Australian businesses are wanting to squeeze out religion when globally the world is becoming more religious.  As Dr Brian J. Grim (President of the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation) has observed through his research,  “religious freedom is good for the economy, good for society, and good for business”.

Underneath this wave is a strong current to strip religious Australians of their freedom to hold and speak of their beliefs. This is no mere hypothetical; the proof is in the Israel Folau case, and in many other cases that have not gained attention by the media. Remember, it was not the tone of Folau’s Instagram posts that led to his dismissal (even I took issue with his tone), for as Rugby Australia’s CEO, Raelene Castle, admitted, even quoting the Bible would have been cause for Folau’s sacking. 

There are many workers who speak with me in private, employed across professions and industries, and who have been frightened into silence by their workplace, afraid they will lose their job if they dare mention their faith in Jesus Christ.  To be more accurate, the fictitious Jesus who embraces the new sexual morality is permissible, just not the Jesus who subscribes to the Bible. 

Both the ACTU and AI have an invested interest in this discussion and ought to be heard. I get it, anyone believing the straw man arguments may well express concerns over religious workers causing “workplace bullying, aggression, harassment including sexual harassment, discrimination, or other unreasonable behaviour”.  In reality, such cases are unusual. Is there no room for discussion and disagreement over life’s biggest questions, either in the workplace or on people’s private social media accounts? This rhetoric about harm and bullying too easily becomes political speak, cloaking what is really going on under the guise of justice and human rights. 

In some quarters, bullying is now code for, this Christian doesn’t support gay marriage. Or, that employee doesn’t join in workplace rituals for LGBT celebration days. And, I don’t like the article my colleague shared on his Facebook page and so I’m reporting him to the HR department.

Lovespeech

Let’s look at the ANZ’s new messaging. ANZ has released a document entitled, “Your Guide To Love Speech“.

“During the 2020 Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras Festival, ANZ is taking a stand against hurtful language and has launched #LoveSpeech – a national campaign to educate Australians on the impact that hurtful language has on the LGBTIQ+ community.”

“By changing hateful messages to give them new meaning, we hope to create awareness, understanding, and unity. That’s what Love Speech is all about.”

I assume the document (with its accompanying posters) are mandatory in ANZ workplaces. I also assume that ANZ board are comfortable for staff to share this messaging outside of work. Indeed, ANZ specifies that this is a “national campaign to educate Australians”.

I am all for ‘love speech’, but what ANZ mean by love is, the unqualified affirmation of the new sexual ethic. And what they consider hate speech includes what are reasoned and deeply held beliefs for millions of Australians. It is quite extraordinary but ANZ feel so confident about their posturing that they can explicitly state that mere expression of a belief in heterosexual only marriage is a form of hate speech.

My question to ANZ is, what will happen to employees who cannot get behind this campaign and who hold a different opinion? What is to become of employees who are discovered expressing a different opinion? What will happen to the employee who either at work or in public voices disagreement with this campaign?

Are we to conclude that affirming gay marriage and transgenderism is an inherent requirement for employment at a bank?

It’s not as though ANZ, Rugby Australia, and some Unions hate religion, they just can’t accept religion that doesn’t fully embrace their virtue signalling.  This is about controlling religion (specifically Christianity). This wave of authoritarian secularism pervades our education systems, now employment, the public square, and may soon pour inside religious institutions and churches. We are fools to think otherwise. The gods of secularism will not tolerate an alternative, even if means dismantling the faith upon which the structures and fibres of our great society were built. Religion is to be controlled, much like during the good old days of Ancient Rome or in today’s Communist China, where Christianity is permitted so long as all the non-communist bits are deleted. This would all sound crazy and like the ravings of religious nut stuck on hyperbolic drive, except that Australia has already begun witnessing this cultural control. 

And that is why the Religious Discrimination Bill matters. The Bill aims to preserve the kinds of freedom Australians have enjoyed for decades. This is about maintaining a healthy pluralism and retaining an essential ingredient of a civilised society.  It is difficult to assess the Union’s letter through the lens of a newspaper article, for the spin may not accurately represent the written concerns; I don’t know. Is there warrant for further consideration of the “Folau clause”? Perhaps so. Of course, we should want the Bill to be as fair and useful as possible.

The broader issue is of course, that the culture has shifted. Increasingly, religious people are being informed that their opinions are not welcome in the public square. It is not acceptable to believe in heterosexual-only marriage. It is only okay to share views that fully conform to the narrow and intolerant sexual agenda that is being preached in most almost every sphere of life in contemporary Australia.  The Federal Government is acting to introduce the religious discrimination Bill for the very reason that religious Aussies are losing their jobs and being squeezed out of schools, because of their religious convictions. 

Whatever the outcome of this religious discrimination bill, I hope and pray Christians will continue to follow the ethic give to us by the Lord Jesus Christ: to honour him and to respect those among whom we work, to be gentle and kind and to give reason for the hope we have and to not shy away from the good news we have come to know and cherish above everything. 

Hypocritical Leadership (Matthew 23)

Our Bible text at Church yesterday was Matthew chapter 23. It is a difficult passage to preach, not least because a pastor teaching about sinful leadership is a hazardous undertaking. As I meditated on Jesus’ words last week, and even now, I am aware of my own sinful proclivities and failings. Christ’s words cause me to reflect on my own life and public ministry, which of course is a good thing to do.

It was also difficult to preach on this Scripture without being aware of recent revelations of spiritual and moral failings by high profiled Christian leaders. One does not need to be intimately involved in these stories to sense a degree of dismay, anger, and sadness; people have been abused and betrayed, and the Gospel dragged into the mud.  The Church is meant to reflect the character of Christ and should be the safest environment on earth for people. Often this is the case, but not always.

I am not about to impose Matthew ch.23 on each of those situations or to assume that behind these men are the same set of motives and attitudes that Jesus is exposing among the Pharisees and teachers of the law. I am not writing in response to these cases, but am rather thinking more broadly about leadership because of having just preached on Matthew. ch.23. Having said that, as we come to terms with the nature of Christian leadership and the kind of leaders our churches and organisations need, Jesus’ address raises several invaluable cautions and helps.

What is so astonishing about Matthew ch.23 is that the people Jesus is calling us to avoid were the model citizens of that culture. The Pharisees and scribes were the spiritual and social leaders of the day. People looked up to them and tried to emulate them. Jesus says, do otherwise. No fewer than six times does he call them hypocrites (and hypocrite is among the more polite names he uses here). The hypocrite is a pretender, someone uses religion to feed their own ego, they use people to fuel their pride and hold onto power. Jesus is not directing his attention at individuals who have committed a single sin; he is describing a pattern of behaviour that stems from an egotistic (and perhaps even narcissistic) attitude of the heart. This is habit-forming behaviour.

These are ominous words for anyone who holds a position of authority in a local church, and they are words of wisdom and grace for the rest of us who sit under the leadership in our churches. You can listen to the sermon via this link. What I wish to do here is offer six reflections on leadership based on my meditations on Matthew ch.23.

1. Jesus knows our hearts.

If Jesus knows the motivations of the Pharisees and exposes them before the population of Jerusalem, surely he is aware of the attitudes and impulses that shape our own lives and ministry.

“Nothing in all creation is hidden from God’s sight. Everything is uncovered and laid bare before the eyes of him to whom we must give account.” (Hebrews 4:13)

2. Jesus opposes hypocrisy

As difficult as Bible passages like Matthew ch.23 are, they are a good and gracious word from God. Jesus is showing us that God both sees injustice and he opposes hypocrisy. God is not okay with people being used and abused.  Some of the strongest language used in Scripture is found here coming from the mouth of the Lord Jesus.

The Lord Jesus not only denounced hypocrisy in the strongest terms, he explains why this is necessary. The first ‘woe’ outlines the justification for Jesus’ judgment.

“Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the door of the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.  (v.13)

Hypocrisy has a devastating effect on those who are under such leadership. While outward appearances suggest spiritual vitality and attractiveness, the inner realities are very different.

Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.

 Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. 28 In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness. (vv.25-28)

Such leadership confuses people, misleading people into believing error and into acting inappropriately and coming to the wrong conclusions about God. Hypocrisy distorts  God’s vision for his Church.

3. Be careful who we follow

Jesus’ words are not hypotheticals but address real men who abused their authority and who were responsible for causing real damage to real people.  The purpose of his words is to inform and to warn so that we avoid following the hypocrite. Of course, part of the problem is that we often only make this discovery after the fact. Even as Jesus explains, it’s hard to spot a hypocrite.  There are signs and we can learn to discern the traits, but it’s not always an easy task. For those who are taken in, you are a victim of malicious intent. The rest of us need to recognise the abuse for what it is, own up to our failings in protecting people, and learn to more effectively guard the flock as God calls us to do.

When we see a brilliant public speaker, or erudite thinker, or captivating person, be slow, be wise, and test them. Don’t ignore character for charisma. Don’t dismiss godliness because of personality. The wolf may appear cute and fluffy, but don’t be fooled!

wolf

Spotted this wolf in Montana back in 2013

Under God’s providence, in the different spheres of life there are authorities, small ‘a’ authorities whom we ought to respect and follow. For example, our parents, the boss at work, the Government, and the Elders at Church. However, we should not blindly follow any of them.

Indeed, one of the sharp contrasts Jesus establishes is that between the leaders in Jerusalem and the true leader, whom he identifies as ‘Father in heaven’ and as ‘Messiah’.

And do not call anyone on earth ‘father,’ for you have one Father, and he is in heaven. Nor are you to be called instructors, for you have one Instructor, the Messiah. (vv.9-10)

At the end of the day, we have one Lord and he can be trusted. He doesn’t treat his own with disdain, for he loves his own.

4. Be careful who we appoint

It is no small thing for a church to appoint pastors, elders, and deacons. The Scriptures urge us to to be slow and deliberate. The New Testament outlines prerequisites for those desiring to serve as pastoral ministry, and we would do well to rely heavily upon these Biblical processes.

As a Pastor, I understand the pressures of never having enough people to serve in different ministries. I also understand the pressures of appointing the vocal member, the eager member, or the well-liked member of the congregation. They may or may not be suited to the role but we are not serving our churches well by shortcutting due diligence.

5. Be careful who we claim to be

Dr. Jonathan Haidt, is a distinguished moral psychologist from Virginia University. He introduces his book, The Happiness Hypothesis, with the unsettling observation,

“It is the realization that we are all self-righteous hypocrites”

In another volume, The Righteous Mind, Haidt writes,

“We are indeed selfish hypocrites so skilled at putting on a show of virtue that we fool even ourselves.”

Leaders turn to hypocrisy because opportunity and position affords them to exercise the already existing condition in the heart. Where in our own lives are we aware of the Pharisaic tendencies? How do Jesus’ words make us uncomfortable about the realisation of our own desires?

6. The leadership our churches need

“The greatest among you will be your servant.  For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” (vv.11-12)

These words are foremost autobiographical, for who is the greatest and who has humbled themselves more the Lord Jesus Christ? He did so first as our substitute and for our salvation; he humbled himself even to the point of death on the cross. And second, His life is our guide showing us how to lead and love God’s people.

God hasn’t preserved these words of Christ in Holy Scripture so that we would neglect them. They serve as a timely word to Churches whom Christ loves. They are a public admonishment to structures and offices who neglect their duty before God. These words are a call to repentance for leaders who have used and abused the people under their care.

Jesus asks,

“How will you escape being condemned to hell?” 

He then adds,

“Therefore I am sending you prophets and sages and teachers.”

The question is for those of us who are in leadership is, will we listen?

What I’ve observed from an exchange with Peter FitzSimons

Last night Peter FtizSimons tweeted an article that was published in the Fairfax newspapers, written by Monash University’s, Associate Professor Luke Beck. With the headline, “Religious discrimination bill backfires on Christians”, Beck mounted a shallow and rather silly case in which he not only threw paper-thin arguments at Christians but also managed to insult everyone else.

I wrote a letter to the Editor, which was published in The Age yesterday (see below), and I tweeted my response to Fitz last night. He asked a couple of polite questions which I responded to with the brevity that Twitter only permits. But then, with a mountain of surprise as thick as thin a slice of toast, the retorts came thick and fast from twitter’s moral mob.

Following this brief exchange with the Fitz, I have been reminded of the following:

1. Ignorance of Christianity is sky high in Australia.

2. Churches failing to deal with sin in their midst have done enormous damage to the Gospel

3. Churches who protect bad theology and promote false versions of Christianity have caused huge social confusion and damage.

4. The sins of the past are not forgotten

5. Lots of people must be learning their history from the back of cereal boxes or from National Geographic rather than from, you know, actual history. (I speak as someone who studied history at university)

6. People are prepared to whitewash the historical record in order to sustain their point of view.

7. People are getting their information about the religious discrimination bill from the media outlets who propagate their already formed views. Responding to or challenging misconceptions is like trying to roll a boulder up a mountainside.

UNADJUSTEDNONRAW_thumb_1722

What should Christians do?

1. Own our sins, confess them and repent of them

2. Stop protecting and promoting garbage theology that comes from Marx’s cell in hell

3. Don’t whitewash history. Some people have done horrendous things in the name of Christ

4. Remember the Gospel is good news. It really is true and good and beautiful and life changing.

5. Become more like the Lord Jesus: Love God and love our neighbours

6. Do good to those who don’t like you

7. Twitter is a poor platform for exchanging ideas and having meaningful conversations

Finally, I’m reminded of these words spoken by the Lord Jesus,

“By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.” (Matthew 7)

 

 

My letter in The Age (Feb 21):

Luke Beck’s attempt to scare Christians away from the religious discrimination bill amounts to shooting blanks; noisy but harmless. Firstly, Christians are quite used to people insulting their faith. It’s been happening for 2,000 years and there’s little reason to think that will change.

Second, I suspect many unbelieving Australians will be surprised by Beck’s small opinion of them, suggesting that they would stoop so low that “Employers will be able to ridicule Christians in the workplace” and “Doctors will be able to humiliate Christian patients.”

If you’re mean to us, we’ll be mean to you! While Beck seems content to attribute that modus operandi to our society, I much prefer Jesus’ ethic, “But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you”.

 

 


The Age published a response to my letter today (Feb 23):

“Pastor Murray Campbell knows his theology but perhaps not his history. Christians, over many centuries, have not merely insulted, but tried to obliterate the faiths of others. The Crusades, the Inquisition, the burning of witches, missionaries as agents of the colonial power in Africa, Asia, the Americas and Australia…the list goes on.

It’s difficult to reconcile the pastor’s words of love and tolerance with the history of the institutions he represents

All over the world, Christians have attempted to wipe out cultural and spiritual practices and even committed genocide in the name of their God. Take a look at the record. Christians are not the victims here

Susan Green, Castlemaine”

3 brief responses to Susan:

Hi Susan

  1. Like I mention above, I studied history at university. In fact in both of my degrees I have studied lots of history.
  2. Your examples go some way to demonstrate the kinds of issues I have raised in this blog post about popular history telling.
  3. Perhaps you could have read something I’ve written before declaring my ignorance of history.

The Myth of Finding a Church like me

“I’m looking for a church that is just like me.”

Few people would say it quite so crassly, but the sentiment is commonplace. When visitors come to Mentone, and when people join the church and when others leave, too often the issue has to do with finding a church that has the right fit. By which people mean, it’s just like me. I need a church that provides the ministries I am looking for and with people I can identify with and where the style reflects my personal preferences.

Both as a pastor of a church and as a church member, I’m aware that finding a church that mirrors my own cultural and personality preferences isn’t an easy task. There are not many churches in Melbourne where I can find fellow opera listening, cricket watching, Carlton supporting, history loving, fine food eating, Rothko admiring, Christians. It’s not that I’m a cultural snob as such, but that everyone else is a philistine (don’t be offended, that’s a joke…sort of!).

 

kcM3XSXSxjfGtdlRuMQ

There are good reasons for joining and leaving a church, and not so good reasons. There are sad reasons and sinful reasons. But among the most common that I hear relates to what I’m calling a spiritualised version of natural selection.

I’ve given up trying to recall all the times’ someone has said to me, ‘Murray, there are not enough young families at ‘your’ church’. Or, there are too many children. Or. the youth group is too small. Or, there are not enough people my age. Or, where are all the elderly people? Or, the Church is too large….too small. The music is too new….too traditional. No doubt, you’ve also heard all these reasons, and perhaps you’ve used them yourself. The problem is, these categories don’t come to us from the Scriptures, but from the world around us.

Why do we place so much value on finding people our own age or people who share our social preferences? On one level, it is natural for us to congregate with people like ourselves. Uni students are naturally drawn toward other uni students. Families with children find it easy to mix with other families who have children. None of this is wrong as such, but the Gospel brings together people not on the basis of natural and intuitive networks but on the basis of a supernatural work of God’s Spirit in the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ.

If we dig a little deeper into the psyche behind natural selection, we discover that there is something rather insidious about choosing a church based on natural selection rather than criteria set by the Gospel of reconciliation.

The Bible reveals a vision for God’s church that is better and is the perfect counterpoint to the monotonous song that remain no.1 on the Aussie charts. One of God’s goals through the Gospel is to bring together people who have nothing in common and yet in Christ share everything.

At the time when Paul wrote to the Church in Ephesus, the great cultural divide was between Jews and Gentiles. Paul reminded them of who it is that brought them together,

“remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

14 For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, 15 by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, 16 and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. 17 He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.

19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone.”

To the Galatians the Apostle said,

“There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:18)

God didn’t choose us according to the rules of natural selection, but according to supernatural grace. When we judge our church according to the whim of natural selection we are cutting against the very means by which a church is formed and grows.

In contrast, the early churches consisted of an array of people from different cultures and classes. The fact that rich and poor, men and women, Jew and Gentile, alike were members of churches, serving one another in love, was one of the realities that made the church attractive to surrounding people. Here was a place where status didn’t matter, and where otherwise unlike people found the deepest and most stable bond that can be had in this world.

There are of course some criteria that do matter when it comes to joining a church and remaining in that Church. For example, theology. There needs to be sufficient theological alignment, otherwise, you’ve already set the trajectory for an unhappy ending. Language is another important factor. It’s difficult to talk and listen and build relationships when you don’t share the same tongue. And we mustn’t neglect location. If you’re travelling 40 minutes each way to Church on a Sunday, how involved can you be in the life and health of that Church? Are you prepared to drive that distance every week, on Sundays and for a midweek Bible study? Are your neighbours and friends (who presumably live near your home and whom you’re inviting to church) also prepared to travel that distance? Perhaps you should find a local church or be prepared to move closer to the church that you have covenanted to join.

When we allow the Bible’s vision of Church to inform and transform our own agendas and expectations, the gains are immeasurable. We begin building a church on grace, not on personal gain. We prove to the world that Christ is true and that he is enough. We demonstrate the breadth and beauty of Gospel reconciliation.

So long as we live by the insatiable individualism that is eating away at our culture, we will diminish the beauty of the church, we will deny the power of the gospel, and we hamstring Gospel centred grace and growth. To be blunt, we will walk away from brothers and sisters for the simple reason, they are not quite like us

When Susan and I were living in London we joined a small group made up of members from the church we were attending. At 23 years of age, I was the youngest in the group. The eldest was well over 80. Each week we met in someone’s living room, 12 people from very different walks of life: students, workers, retirees, singles and married, children and no children. The fact that we had little in common with other members of the group didn’t detract from the group. The opposite was true. Together we had Christ and this unity in Christ was enough Jesus. Around Christ, we learned to love and encourage one another. That’s what the Gospel does. It brings people together who in other spheres of life would never connect let alone build friendship.

While it may be counter-intuitive, by joining a church where you are perhaps one of only a handful of under 25s  or the only family, you may well become that new branch whom God uses to bring more young adults or more families into the church. Instead of try and walk out, why not trust and commit?

Finding a church filled with people like me is a myth that we need to dispell. As an individual who has his own social preferences, I understand the pull to find people with whom we have many things in common. These patterns of socialising can be a good from God and therefore to be enjoyed, but they ought not to be the criteria upon which we join or leave a church.

Instead of looking for a church that is like me (or like you), let’s join and serve churches that look like Jesus and want to become more like Him.

Rain, the ABC, and the heresy of mentioning prayer

The ABC has been caught out in the rain and subjected to a torrent of tweets demanding a retraction. They ran a story about the rain that is falling in NSW with the blasphemous headline, “Prayers answered as NSW rainfall extinguishes 74-day Currowan bushfire”.

Thousands of comments have poured down over Twitter and Facebook, expressing anger at the ABC for daring to use the word, prayer. 

“Prayers have no place in journalism. #ThisisNotJournalism”

ABC news… prayers had nothing to do with it. Please delete this offensive tweet. #FreedomFromReligion

“Prayers answered” ???

Seriously  @abcnews get this religious propaganda out of your lexicon. The rain came because science. Nothing more nothing less.  Sure as shootin’ not because someone asked nicely for it.”

I suspect the choice of wording had nothing to do with actual belief in God, as though the editor was personally thanking God or encouraging readers to do so. Like millions of Australians every day, we borrow words and ideas from Christianity to express our own thoughts. In this case, someone at the ABC probably thought they were being cute.  It’s a rather innocuous and generic way of noting thankfulness that the bushfires have been extinguished.

But in Australia today, this cannot be tolerated. References to God cannot be permitted unless it is in the pursuit of mocking religion. Religion (and specifically, Christianity) is to be ridiculed by the media in the most celebratory and obnoxious ways, but no one is to dilute the purity of worship to secularism. Introducing the word prayer is sacrilege. It might encourage someone to, you know, actually pray to God. Worse still, maybe there’s a religious person working for the ABC and they’re trying to brainwash the country with subtle suggestions of Divine power.

Our friendly neighbourhood secularists have reminded us, even an irreligious use of a religious word must be opposed. I couldn’t help but turn a little smile as I noted that some of the people yelling at the ABC today were, only weeks earlier, defending the ABC for its evenhandedness and balanced reporting.  But now, they are demanding to know the name of the editor who approved the headline; no doubt to shame them and call for their immediate dismissal.

Screen Shot 2020-02-09 at 4.54.02 pm

Wait till the outrage mob realise that there are Christians working at the Bureau of Meteorology and that some of our country’s Climate Change scientists are also Christian! Yes, that’s right, scientists who also pray. Scientists who believe in God and in the Bible!

The ABC has now repented of their grievous sin. The headline has been replaced, but our moral judges are not yet satisfied. What guarantees will be put in place so that this never happens again?

In contrast to this irrational and over the top reaction to the ABC, I think prayer is great.  We should thank God for the rain, for the rain has put out dreadful fires. We should also ask God for safety for those who may experience flooding, just as we have done so with the recent fires.

 

Screen Shot 2020-02-09 at 4.58.14 pmA friend of mine who lives in the Blue Mountains faced the threat of bushfire only a month ago. This weekend he called the SES for sandbags to help protect his home from floodwaters. Fire and flood remind us that the world, as wonderful as it is, is not the safe and secure environment that we long for. As we have been reminded in recent weeks, humanity has done much to harm the world; it is, to use a biblical word, cursed. It is both a place of extraordinary beauty and terror. In the current cultural climate, we mostly focus on the things we don’t like. Australian society is filled with perennial complaining and whinging, and in that, we often forget the tremendous blessings that we enjoy and the good that we can see and hold.

Many Australian have been praying for rain, both to put out a terrible season of bushfire and also to break the drought has gripped so much of the country. Has God answered those prayers?

Sometimes our words carry more truth in them than we realise. The angry mob who have bullied the ABC this afternoon will probably not thank God for the rain. They may well be grateful, but to whom?  Thankful for the meaningless weather patterns that have combined to create the splashes of water on our gardens and in our rivers? Without God, surely the weather is just nature’s mechanics at work without reason and meaning? The clouds did not form for our benefit, to help us in any way. There is no ethic or design; it’s just water. That’s all it is. The very notion of thankfulness for rain is an illusion, an evolutionary mistake in the human consciousness that causes us to pray and thank a God who does not exist.

Or maybe, as the Apostle Paul once told a crowd in the city of Iconium,

“In the past, God let all nations go their own way. Yet he has not left himself without testimony: He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons; he provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy.” (Acts 14:16-17).

Serving up more Spin

We have moved beyond peering through the looking glass. We’ve entered a crazy new world where left is right and wrong is good and the impossible is normal. Sky is grass and the ocean is space. Nothing is what it seems to be, and questioning the new morality is the only heresy.

The only problem with this new world of topsy-turvey is that it’s given a good shake every 6 months or so, and then once again all the epistemological furniture and our moral certainties are thrown into the air. And it’s not the sanest or smartest who catch the debris and reorder the room but the loudest and most militant.

Case in point, the recent Australian Tennis Open. First of all, what an amazing tournament. Second, in yesterday’s SMH Peter FitzSimons threw a volley at Novak Djokovic for touching the umpire’s foot during the final. If Fitz’s issue was simply that Djokovic committed a foot violation and should be fined for it, that’s fine. But you see, Fitz’s fury doesn’t depend on right and wrong, and rules of any kind, but on whether he supports the activity of the person. Remember, it was only a few days earlier when John McEnroe and Martina Navratilova unfurled a political banner on one of the courts in Melbourne Park. It was a protest against Margaret Court, with Navratilova also attempting to grab the umpire’s microphone in order to speak to the crowd and media. In that case, Peter FitzSimons quickly came out in support of the two former tennis players, who not only broke tournament protocols but brought the game into disrepute.

He tweeted,

“If your last name is McEnroe or Navratilova and you are on a tennis court, you have no need to “hijack” a tournament. You have earned your spot as your sport’s most respected voices.”

Court

In contrast, days earlier Margaret Court was invited to a special evening during the tournament where she was recognised by Tennis Australia for her famous Grand Slam of 1970. On Court, Margaret Court did not use the event to promote her personal beliefs. She said nothing about her views on sexuality which have been denounced in some parts of the community.

The upside roundabout of modern Western thinking isn’t done yet. While Martina Navratilova got away with her anti-Court banner and her online letter was republished or quoted by major media outlets all around Australia and the world, it was only last year that she was sacked by an LGBT group. While serving as an ambassador for Athlete Ally, Navratilova criticised transgender athletes and claimed that men competing as women are cheats and being unfair. Hmmm…so Margaret Court name must be removed because of her views on sexuality, and yet Navratilova, according to the latest definitions of phobia is also a phobe and a bigot. Indeed, how on earth did Tennis Australia miss that one when they ranted about their inclusivity policy?  How can we support and praise the on-court protest by a former player who publicly speaks against transgender women playing tennis at the highest level?

Thankfully, amidst all these double faults being served by our social and sporting commentators,, there was some great tennis played both on and off the court. As journalists tried to grab quotes from players about all kinds of social and moral issues, some players like Novak Djokovic and our very own Ash Barty, saw the spin coming and avoided it with skill and grace; well done.

All this demonstrates these three simple points: One, intersectional politics and cancel culture are intent on smashing their way into every pocket of life. Second, it is an ultimately hypocritical and destructive ethic. Three, our society needs a better way of evaluating moral confusion and for relating to the other.

I remember the words of Jesus,

“Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free” (John 8:32).

That sounds pretty enticing. Just maybe, there is more wisdom and compassion, more goodness and truth in Jesus Christ than we realise. Of course, Jesus remains no.1 target of the cancel culture, but just perhaps, we could look at the world the right way up and see that he is not an opponent to be beaten but the one who gave his life to be our advocate. Recognising such liberating news requires a doss of humility and sadly, few in this age of rage feel able to accept what Jesus says. My suggestion is this, while the intersectional mob throw balls at each other, step aside and take a few moments to consider the One who offers, ‘truth that sets you free’.

 

 

New Concerns over Victoria’s Proposed Banning of Conversion Practices

As a Victorian, I have a moral obligation to report to authorities personal knowledge of alleged child abuse. As a pastor of a church, I have both a moral and legal duty to report knowledge of or suspicions of child abuse. Mandatory reporting is a social good. Even without the legal requirement, one’s natural concerns for a child’s wellbeing would automate contacting the police.

In Victoria, under new laws being proposed by the Andrews Government, I can be imprisoned for 12-18 months, for speaking up against the psychological and physical trauma inflicted upon children by gender warriors and dangerous medicos who work to change a child’s gender or sex.

img_9452

Last year the Victorian Government revealed plans to ban conversion practices. While the original issue was gay conversion therapy, the scope has been broadened to include any and all sexualities, including transgenderism. In November, I exposed the biased and flawed reports upon which the Government is basing its definition. I also noted at the time that the proposed definition of conversion therapy is so broad that it includes normal Church preaching from the Bible where topics of sexuality are mentioned. Indeed, a Christian wedding could also fall foul for Christian Churches define marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman. In what would be an extraordinary attack on Christianity, an Australian State Government is arguing that Classical Christian teaching is harmful and can be banned.

Earlier in January, retired Judge of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia, Stuart Lindsay, wrote an article where he alerts Victorians to another serious implication of Government’s planned laws. With the apt title, Sound an Alarm: Gender Activism Is About To Silence Us, Judge Lindsay explains how,

“the Victorian government intends to pass a law very soon that may see ordinary citizens imprisoned if they speak up against the chemical, psychological and physical mutilation of confused adolescents.” 

And,

“The discussion paper and the reports it relies on, together with Ms. Hennessey’s public utterances about them, make it clear that Victoria intends to make plain what is latent or ambiguous in Queensland’s proposed legislation. It is not just the individual transsexual or homosexual who needs protection from conversion; no, the criminality can arise outside of any therapeutic context. It is society that needs to be protected so the mere utterance of heterodox views about affirmation of gender or sexual “choice” must be extirpated.”

“This is what is about to happen: talking about or writing about or counselling against or promoting caution about affirmation as the sole medically permitted response to any putative decision by an individual to transition to their non-natal sex, or even discussing the practice of affirmation generally in a non-supportive way, is about to made illegal. It will at the very least be subject to civil penalty proceedings (in which case, see you in the Tribunal, facing up against publicly funded gender radicals).  Much more likely are serious criminal penalties. I mean prison sentences”

The irony is not difficult to see. Indeed, it is not so much ironic as it is moronic and downright dangerous for anyone with a conscience and who still believes in science and commonsense. According to Premier Daniel Andrews and Attorney General Jill Hennessey, praying for individuals who are struggling with their sexuality is immoral, and preaching Biblical sexual ethics is also wrong. But telling a boy that they are really a girl and putting them in a dress, and changing their name, and beginning medical procedures and filling them with drugs to alter their biology and physical appearance is considered a moral imperative. Of course, the issue is becoming more insidious as a growing number of psychologists and doctors express concerns over how children with gender dysphoria are being treated.

I am quickly writing this and putting it into the public space before Parliament sits and I find writing my memoirs from a prison cell.

Judge Lindsay notes the real agenda behind the Government’s move, as I have also noted in the past. It is grievous to say but it has little to do with the wellbeing of children, and much to do with implementing cultural Marxism. Before this is dismissed as one of those tiresome and hyperbolic caricatures,  Roz Ward, (who is the architect of Safe Schools and academic at La Trobe University), has openly admitted that this is the case. 

To close, allow me to repeat what I wrote lastNovember,

As it stands, the Government’s proposal is nothing short of forced conversion. Without significant revisions, this looks like an attempt to control and redefine what religious organisations believe and teach about human sexuality and flourishing.

Victoria is witnessing a fundamental clash of worldviews, one supports a healthy pluralism in our society and the other believes in conforming to a narrow and uncompromising agenda.

The Government’s current position on conversion practice is about pressuring religious groups to change their views on sexuality. If the definitions were limited to those rare, extreme, and dangerous practices that some peoples have been subjected, there is warrant for discussion. What we are seeing thus far from the Government is unnecessary and contravenes those basic distinctions between Church and State.

Christians don’t believe in forced conversions. We believe in persuading others of a message that is good and attractive. Christianity is by definition a conversion religion. No one is born a Christian. People become Christians as they are convinced by the truthfulness and goodness of Christianity’s message, the Gospel of Jesus of Christ.

Christianity posits conversion as a result of personal conviction and choice, whereas the Government’s position seems to be, convert by coercion. Indeed, placing this conversation on conversion under the “Department of Justice and Community Safety” is probably not meant to be prophetic, but the irony is certainly not be missed.

All Victorians should be concerned by the Government’s plan to ban conversion practices. Let me reiterate, the Government is indicating more than simply banning practices that have proven harmful to some individuals, they are proposing to force-convert religious organisations and churches to the theological convictions of the new secular sexual milieu.

In the future, will Churches and religious organisations in Victoria have freedom to preach, teach, and counsel and pray in line with their religious convictions? Without significant revisions to the proposed definition, the answer is probably no

Indeed, as Judge Lindsay has now revealed, a prison term may also be in the offering for those evil Christians and dreadful medical professionals who dare speak out against the new ‘normal’.

 

 


Note: this is not a personal or political attack on Daniel Andrews. Earlier this month I praised him for his work during the bushfire crisis

Responding to the Australian Bush Fire Crisis

We spent the first three days of 2020 driving to and from Canberra, for a family wedding. Once we drove across the border from Victoria into NSW, visibility on the road slowly deteriorated as the air became more dense with smoke. By the time we reached Canberra, we could see less than 100m in front. Getting out of the car, the smoke clung to our clothes and flushed into our throats as we breathed, causing everyone to cough and eyes to sting.

We had the radio tuned to the ABC for reports on the fires. As we drove into Canberra we listened to a pollution expert explain that air quality index readings above 200 are considered hazardous to health. That day in Canberra (as it was for most days in recent weeks), the readings spilled over 2,000, and even reaching 5,000 during parts of the day. Canberra wasn’t only the dullest city in Australia, it now has the worse air quality of any city in the world.

Our hotel was situated just around the corner from  Parliament House. The flag and spire on top of the building that usually dominates the area, couldn’t be seen due to the blanketing haze. We drove across Lake Burley Griffen with its famous fountain but all was invisible to us.

Picture this, the situation around the country worsened over the week. Returning home to Melbourne on the Thursday, we drove south along the Hume Highway. For the entire 700km journey smoke covered the roads and the paddocks and hills on either side. 700km of smoke from bushfires. As we approached Albury/ Wodonga the smoke thickened, and at times visibility on the road was less than 200m. We stopped for lunch in Wodonga, where the smoke was heaviest. Our food had little taste for the smoke covered everything. The air tasted of ash, and its’ heaviness found a home in our throats and noses.

I have passed through bushfire areas before. Growing up in country Victoria, I’ve experienced burnt out bushland and smoke lingering around the hills, but never anything so thick and covering an area of such staggering size. Something like 10 million hectares of land is now scorched black. That’s an area larger than many entires States in the USA. More than 20 people have died, 2000 homes destroyed, and it is said that half a billion animals have been killed.

Cooler and wetter conditions mean that most of the fires are now either under control and at least temporarily dampened until the weather changes once again. We can be thankful for this temporary reprieve.

The reason for writing this post less about sharing our recent family road trip and more about offering some advice. Unlike most bushfires in Australian history, this time everyone has an opinion. Some of the suggestions are helpful while others should be avoided.

I want to offer 6 responses that Christians can make following these weeks of fire (and in preparation for the rest of the fire season which we mustn’t forget has another two months to go). I want to begin where I think the Bible encourages us to begin

1. Weep with those who are weeping and mourn with those who are mourning. 

“mourn with those who mourn” (Romans 12:15)

If we cannot start here and empathise with those who have lost much, frankly our opinion about the rest is little more than a noisy gong being played out of rhythm. Fast-forwarding to politicking and virtual signalling is uncouth and uncaring.

2. Avoid the heated and at times disgusting politicisation of these events.

In one sense it is impossible to separate the fires from politics altogether. Of course, understanding what has happened and learning how to better manage the future matters enormously.  However, over the last month, we have seen some of the grossest grandstanding and vilest commentary that I have witnessed in Australian political history.

No, I am not referring to the Prime Minister here. I recognise Scott Morrison has made errors of judgement in his initial responses (in my opinion, taking his family on a one week vacation over Christmas is not one of them). I also think that the opposition leader, Anthony Albanese, has overall addressed the crisis well. While I frequently disagree with the Victorian Premier, Daniel Andrews, he has conducted himself well and served Victorians well throughout this crisis. There have been however too many loud and loquacious voices using this tragedy for political point-scoring.

In such dangerous and exhausting circumstances as the nation has witnessed, there is naturally going to be anger and frustration, especially by those who are closest to the fires. But much social media and media responses have only served to fuel anger and encourage outrage in an irresponsible way, and often by people who know little about the subject matter. My plea is, don’t dump more petrol on the crisis.

Think before you tweet. Check before you share articles. Ask, is this righteous anger or are you justifying your disapproval of political opponents?

3. Don’t claim to be an expert when we are not

I have been asked to write some thoughts on the bushfire emergency. Until now I declined. Let me share why. There are two reasons why I have hesitated in writing anything on the fires. The first reason is that when someone’s house is on fire you don’t stop to argue about how the fire started, you go in and help them. There is a time to critique and analyse, and there is a time to get on with the job of helping out. As I suggested under point 1, many Aussies who have a megaphone in hand have skipped the important step of mourning and weeping, and instead jumped straight to blaming and shaming. Second, while I understand there are 25 million experts on climate change in Australia, I am not one of them. I can offer a point of view about fires and climate change, but I no more an expert than most of my 25 million fellow Australians. The problem is of course, that by even admitting such, there will some critics who assume I must be one of those evil climate deniers. Anything other than shrilling at the top of my lungs has become reason to cast suspicion on a person.

So what do I think? I accept that the globe is warming and that human beings have contributed to this problem. I am not a climate change scientist and neither are most of us. One cool fact though is that at Mentone Baptist Church we have an actual climate change scientist, and conversing with her is more than helpful. In addition to accepting the science on Climate Change, I also accept reporting that has revealed many of the fires that have started this season are the result of human agency; arsonists. Extreme drought conditions in many parts of the country and years of ignoring Indigenous practice of fuel reduction burning are also a combustible combination. It seems as though there are multiple factors contributing to the terrible fires burning across the country, including climate change. Indeed, it only makes sense that climate change will produce more volatile conditions (i.e. droughts and heat) leading to bushfires. It is vital that experts once again meet and provide workable and important solutions for future seasons (which include pathways to introducing more renewable energies). Believing in responsible policies and avoiding extreme rhetoric does not amount to Climate Change denial. These are my 2 cents worth of comments, spoken as an Aussie novice in this area.

4. Donate without playing to the crowds.

When donating to any of the organisations collecting for fire relief, don’t grandstand. It’s helpful to promote organisations who are doing good work but we don’t need to know how generous you are personally.

5. Pray.

Prayer isn’t useless. There are Aussies fighting the fires and who have escaped the fires who’ve been praying and they stand by prayer. Pray is effective for those who pray to a living God who is Sovereign over all things. Christians pray to a loving Father, who is the creator of all things and who is compassionate. We don’t pray because we understand everything that happens, we pray because we trust God who sees all things.

Pray for those fighting the fires. Pray for the communities who are facing fire. Pray for rain. Pray for our Government and political representatives that they will make wise decisions both in their immediate responses and for planning for the long term future. Here is a suggested prayer written by Glenn Davies, Anglican Archbishop of Sydney:

“Our heavenly Father, creator of all things and especially the creator of this land and its original peoples, we call out to you in these desperate times as fires have swept across several parts of our country.

Our hearts cry out to you for those who have lost loved ones, and those who have lost properties in the wake of these ravaging fires 

Father we pray, in your mercy, restrain the forces of nature from creating catastrophic damage; in your mercy protect human life.

Guard those volunteers, rural fire service personnel and emergency services who selflessly step into the breach to fight these fires. Guide police and authorities who help evacuate and shelter those who are displaced.  Bring comfort and healing to all who suffer loss.

Remembering your promises of old that seedtime and harvest will never cease, we pray that you would open the heavens to send refreshing rain upon our parched land. 

In your mercy, we pray for drenching rain. 

We pray that despite the forecasts, in your miraculous power you would bring forth rain to quench these fires and to bring life back into the earth, so that crops may grow and farmers may bring forth the harvest of the land again.

We bring these requests before your throne, in the name of your Son, who died and rose again for our deliverance,

Amen.”

 

6. Put your hope in God

Before Christmas, I wrote an article about hope, because I am increasingly hearing and seeing a young generation express hopelessness and despair. There are many reasons why millennials are sensing a world without hope, and chief among them is the issue of Climate Change.  In that piece, I suggested something that amounts to blasphemy according to some, but it is true and needs saying:

“Climate change isn’t the existential threat facing the planet and humanity. It is a symptom of an ancient problem that we have afforded to ignore for far too long. If there is no God, why should we ultimately concern ourselves with altruism? Why bother with protecting the environment for future generations if purpose is found in the individual and defined by personal satisfaction? The fact that we understand that there are moral boundaries and that the future does matter, is not an argument against Divine purpose but the only rational explanation for having such concerns. How we behave toward one another and how we use the planet is important because this isn’t a meaningless existence.

“He has made everything beautiful in its time. He has also set eternity in the human heart; yet no one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end.” (Ecclesiastes 3:11)

There has been a cosmological battle taking place for millennia, and it is ultimately against the Creator, not the creation. The ancient mandate to care for the world remains, but the growing call to save and redeem the world is not one within our purview. Those who believe we can save the planet have far too high regard for human capability and moral will. I’m not saying, don’t bother reducing carbon omissions and forget about investing in renewable energy; far from it. The house I live in won’t stand forever but it doesn’t mean I neglect the building. I neither wreck the house nor place all my energy and hopes in the house. I’m just pointing out the fact that people putting their ultimate hope in other people will always disappoint in the end. The role of global saviour is too big a job. You see, I don’t believe things are as bad as we suggest they are; despite even the good around us the reality is far more perilous.”

The Bible tells us that the world in which we live, with all its beauty and wonder, is also a dangerous place. It is cursed and corrupted and corroding like those old fashioned corrugated iron roofs that mark the Australian landscape. The hope for creation lies not in our management skills and commitments, but in the Gospel alone. When Christians forget this, we place too great a burden on our children to fix that which we cannot, and we may slide into preaching a Gospel to Australia which is no Gospel at all.

 “19 For the creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. 20 For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope 21 that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.” (Romans 8:19-25)

We can’t survive without hope. Hope in the world or hope in humanity is an age-long route to despair. Human responsibility is noble and right, but the hope of the world cannot rest on the shoulders of any given generation.

“And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out His love into our hearts through the Holy Spirit, whom He has given us” (Romans 5:5)