It was a momentous day at Sydney’s St Andrews Cathedral as celebrities and politicians gathered…for a funeral service.
John Laws’ State Funeral was televised live around Australia this afternoon on Channel 7.
The funeral is, of course, significant for family and friends, for those who knew and loved him. His passing is also emblematic of an older Australia that has become less familiar. Listening to John Laws on 2UE Radio was a regular ritual during my 4-year hiatus in Sydney. He was entertaining and a great interviewer, one whose golden voice softened many a brittle caller. John Laws was one of a dying breed: old school dink di Aussie. He exuded Australia, much like Sydney Harbour, Bondi Beach and the Akrubra. He was an everyman Aussie, who could chat with celebrities and common folk alike with equal measure and interest.
St Andrews Cathedral was filled with the rich and famous, with media personalities and politicians. Russell Crowe gave a moving eulogy, and John Williams echoed the Aussie larrikin spirit with a rendition of ‘True Blue’.
Speaking into the service, woven from beginning to end, were the words of one who was far less popular than John Laws in the day. His words didn’t give him a golden microphone; he instead wore a crown made of thorns. His words will, however, outlast every rhetorical flourish we will ever utter.
And so Kanishka Raffel, Archbishop of Sydney, opened the service with these words,
“We come to together to mourn John Laws, to honour him and to lay to rest his mortal body and to support one another in grief.
We face the certainty of our own death nd judgment. But those who die in Christ share eternal life with him. Therefore in faith and hope we turn to God. “
“In grief we turn to the word made flesh, Jesus, who speak to us grace and truth.”
How much we need men and women who speak with grace and truth. But the reality is, we all fall short in our words and lives. Whether it is with a smooth baritone sound or Estelle Costanza, we’ll all drop like a mic before the throne of God, except for the exceeding grace and kindness of God in Jesus.
‘be kind to each other’
“Be kind to each other” was John Law’s famous sign-off at the end of each show. Boy, we need more kindness, don’t we? More kindness in our homes and schools, more kindness in our cities and offices, more kindness toward friends and those whom we struggle to tolerate.
That is why we’ll do well to return to Jesus. We need the kind of kindness he displayed. Our communities need the kind of truth-telling and grace Jesus was able to speak and show. For his kindness cuts deeper and goes to the very soul of man; indeed, as the Bible explains, it was because of kindness of love that he volunteered to enter the grave.
“when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy.” (Titus 3:4-5)
Here is the link to the State Funeral and watch, listen (including Michael Jensen’s excellent homily) and enjoy
King Charles flew to Rome to pray with Pope Leo. As reporters are headlining, this is big news.
The BBC is making a splash,
“King and Pope make history by praying side by side
King Charles and Pope Leo made history in the Sistine Chapel by praying side by side – a first for the leaders of the Church of England and the Catholic Church.
Under the scrutinising eyes of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment, when Pope Leo said “let us pray”, it meant everyone, including the King, closing a gap that stretched back to the Reformation in the 16th Century.”
SBS,
‘Healing of history’: King Charles and Pope Leo pray together in 500-year first’.
This is the first occasion in 500 years that an English monarch has so publicly aligned with a Pope. The public prayer meeting hasn’t been lost on the media or by Christians worldwide. Despite the historic nature of this meeting, it’s unsurprising, given that the ecumenical King is married to Queen Camilla (who has strong familial links with Roman Catholicism), a step that itself moves history a little closer to its medieval past.
You may be wondering, why is a Baptist interested in this affair? Fair enough. Good question. We live in a global community, and I belong to a Christian denomination and am a child of the Reformation. No doubt many readers are pondering the significance of this public display by the King and Pope, and so sometimes the ‘outside’ voice has more liberty to make observations than those close to the crown and zucchetto. The King of England praying with the Pope is news, even if it has zero impact on what happens this Sunday at church. It may do little to change what happens on Sunday, but the step has symbolic power. Symbols have a habit of punching the air and giving credence to ideas. Should the Church of England one day return to Rome? Will the divorce be followed by a wedding?
Whatever this union symbolises, the King and the Pope praying is paradoxical for 2 obvious reasons: the historical theological divide and the new theological divide.
A history of irreconcilable difference.
The very doctrines and spiritual abuses that led to the Reformation, from Germany to England, haven’t been relinquished by Rome. Indulgences remain widely practised. Rome continues to believe in 7 sacraments. The view that salvation and forgiveness of sins require effort and merit on behalf of the sinner is a hamstring injury that persists to this day.
Over the 500 years since the reformers sought to purify the church in teaching and life, the Roman Catholic Church has doubled down and expanded in its theologising. For example, 1964’s Second Vatican Council, Lumen Gentium 16, states that salvation is given to the anonymous Christian, the person who doesn’t believe in Jesus the Son of God and yet is redeemed. This teaching was upheld by Pope Francis.
It would be a wonderful sight to one day see Rome throwing off the magisterium and for genuine spiritual unity to be found in the one Lord of the church and by his Spirit. After all, the Apostle Paul spells it out for us in Ephesians ch.4,
‘There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all’.
And yet, this is not the situation before us today. The differences between Rome and Canterbury are substantial and primary. Sure, there is also common ground, but does this denude the division over how sinful human beings can be redeemed and given assurance of right standing before God?
So what is the King of England trying to achieve by visiting the Vatican and coming together with the Pope in prayer?
What political statement is being made?
What kind of theological statement are the two heads suggesting?
It is a strange sight.
I imagine Thomas Cranmer rolling in his grave in search of a flame to thrust in his right hand, if he were there, and Ridley sighing with frustration. Hugh Latimer’s dream became a reality, and we can dream again, ‘Be of good comfort, and play the man, Master Ridley; we shall this day light such a candle, by God’s grace, in England, as I trust shall never be put out.’
Maybe this is the point, albeit unbeknownst to the orchestrators of the King’s visit. The candle has not gone out: the UK is witnessing a resurgence of Christian interest and London churches are growing…except where the Church of England who with decision and pageantry, blew out the candle in Canterbury.
The timing of King Charles’ visit to the Vatican to pray with Pope Leo is perhaps perfect. Within weeks of the Church of England giving up on the Christian faith (thanks to the appointment of the new Archbishop of Canterbury), the head of the Church of England flies to Rome.
Old divisions remain formally and substantially, and there is a new divide.
A new divide
Before I point out the enormous elephant standing next to the King and the Pope in the Cistine Chapel, let me clarify, I love my Roman Catholic friends. There are many Roman Catholic brothers and sisters around the world who believe the Gospel and love Jesus, and with whom we may pray and share in common. Rome in the 16th Century may have designated the Reformers as heretics, but the likes of Martin Luther and Jean Calvin saw Rome as a genuine but very sick church.
Also this, when it comes to the Church of England, there are many faithful and amazing Parishes across the UK, and many, many faithful Anglican churches around the globe, including Australia and here in Melbourne; praise God. The Anglican Communion has, however, shifted. The seat of Canterbury is broken thanks to the ‘Living in Love and Faith’ offering and appointing one of its chief architects, Sarah Mullally, to be the new Archbishop.
It is with this issue that a new chasm between Rome and the CHurch of England has opened up. On this matter of human sexuality and marriage, there is a fundamental disagreement between Rome and the Church of England. Canterbury has bent the knee to the cultural zeitgeist. Indeed, on this and many ethical subjects, Rome has proven more resilient than those Protestant denominations that continue to perform to the crowds, hoping for appeal and applause. Let the lesson be learned: if our theological preferences change according to seasonal cultural winds, it is only a matter of time before your church blows down!
I suspect this is one reason why young people in the West are as likely to be drawn to finding a home with Rome as they are in the local Church factory or Saint Bob Anglican.
In the last 5 years, the tissue-thin screen veiling the new atheism has been removed, and the Wizard of Oz is nothing more than a scrawny man holding a megaphone and shouting, ‘There is no God’. 50-year-old middle-class Melbourne may be stuck on this Spotify playlist, but younger generations know better. People know instinctively that there is something real and important beyond this material world. We need it to be, because God knows, life gets pretty miserable without Divine forgiveness and hope. Take away God, and we have 8 billion people pretending there is commonality and trying to figure out a reason why brute power shouldn’t win the day.
Of course, in the search for God, one of the mistakes we can make is to think that if it looks and smells old, it must be the real thing. I say, don’t judge a church by its smell! The Reformers were right. Does a church believe, read and teach the Bible? Do they worship the Triune God? Do they believe in the sufficiency of Christ’s substitutionary atonement death? Do they affirm the physical resurrection of Jesus? Are they denying or adding to the One Gospel? If we can tick these boxes, then they are the real church where God dwell by His Spirit.
Part of the search for God is the persistent and right need for security and substance. We see an aged wineskin and assume its contents are priceless. As a Christian minister, I want to argue that true security and substance is found in Christ and his sufficient Gospel. This idea isn’t new and novel; the Reformation rediscovered these precious truths: justification by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. It is, in fact, a Bible idea. If you’re looking for new old, go to the Scriptures!
Two great errors can be committed by a Church. One is to take away from the gospel in the search for relevance, and the other is to add to the gospel. In my view, the Church of England has chosen the former, and Rome, for too long, is persisting with the latter.
Religion can be bewitching. When we catch a whiff of permission giving, we feel liberated to mould God into our own image. At the other spectrum, rules and traditions provide a temporary ballast, and yet both miss the point of Jesus. That makes this meeting between King Charles and Pope Leo both fascinating and superfluous. The power of the Gospel is found in towns throughout Nigeria and in house churches across China, and in the cities of Brazil and the suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne.
Our Bible text this Sunday is a really helpful explainer. It’s not a short read, but if you’re interested in what the Apostolic testimony has to say, it’s worth following the Apostles’ logic from beginning to end. Have a read,
“Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. 2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard? 3 Are you so foolish? After beginning by means of the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by means of the flesh? 4 Have you experienced so much in vain—if it really was in vain? 5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard? 6 So also Abraham “believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.”
7 Understand, then, that those who have faith are children of Abraham. 8 Scripture foresaw that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, and announced the gospel in advance to Abraham: “All nations will be blessed through you.”9 So those who rely on faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith.
10 For all who rely on the works of the law are under a curse, as it is written: “Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law.” 11 Clearly no one who relies on the law is justified before God, because “the righteous will live by faith.”12 The law is not based on faith; on the contrary, it says, “The person who does these things will live by them.” 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole.” 14 He redeemed us in order that the blessing given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles through Christ Jesus, so that by faith we might receive the promise of the Spirit.”
Correction: The original suggested that Queen Camilla is Roman Catholic. That is not the case. What is the case is that Her Majesty’s first marriage was to a Roman Catholic, and her children are Roman Catholic.
The Baptist Union of Victoria (BUV) and Whitley College are going to the Supreme Court.
It is a sad state of affairs. This isn’t anything to gloat about or take joy in. After all, the Scriptures warn us about taking fellow Christians to court.
“If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers!
The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already.” (1 Corinthians 6:1-7)
The fact that the parties are heading to the Supreme Court after a 9-year process signals the nature of the breakdown.
from the Whitley Residential College FB group
The issue relates to the sale of property used by Whitley College. The College Council sold the residential college (known as the Doughnut) and subsequently held the proceeds of the sale (and began using?). The BUV Council challenged both the sale and requested that the proceeds be turned over to the BUV in line with trust arrangements.
Questions were raised as early as 2016 when, to people’s surprise, the property was sold without informing the BUV. For the most part, discussions have taken place quietly in meetings and privately in boardrooms (which is appropriate for initial resolution seeking). When Union delegates have raised questions at various junctions, answers have either been missing or vague. When a report was given to the Baptist Gathering last year, the matter was addressed in such convoluted legal fashion that few had any idea what was being said.
But now, several years down the track since the property sale, the closed doors have been opened. The issue has been on the public record in the courts for some time, and more so now, through recent correspondence issued by the BUV Council and then from Whitley College Council. It is only a matter of time before the story is circulated even further.
On Wednesday, 24 September, the BUV Council sent a letter explaining that the matter is now going before the Supreme Court of Victoria. In the letter, they state,
“Although the property was held in the name of the Baptist Union of Victoria at the time it was sold, the charitable purposes for which the property was held were unclear, as no Trust Deed had been written setting out the terms. Being the named owner of the property, the BUV operated in good faith assuming charitable trustee responsibilities.
When the property was sold in 2016, the funds remained part of a charitable trust that the BUV must oversee. However, upon settlement of the $24.1 million, funds were directed away from the BUV as owner of the property and were not returned when requested.”
A few days (2nd October), Whitley College Chair and Principal issued a statement disputing the BUV Council’s interpretation of the situation,
“Whitley College has considered its position diligently, and has concluded that Whitley College has and continues to be the steward of these trust funds, faithfully applying them to the purposes of theological education and ministerial formation in line with the intent of those who contributed to the properties and its legacy.
While the BUV has presented a different interpretation, we are confident that the documentation demonstrates Whitley’s consistent and proper role as the steward of these resources. We believe that active involvement in the proceedings, including putting to the court an alternative position to the BUV, is the appropriate way to preserve Whitley’s access to funds, vital to its continued operations.”
I’m not here to take sides, but rather hoping to find answers. While murmurings about the dispute have been dripping in the background for years, the fact is, most BUV members have been left in the dark, and even now, remain unaware of the issues and processes that have led to Supreme Court proceedings. We have woken to learn that we are (essentially) suing ourselves. To say that many Victorian Baptists are stunned, angered, and perplexed this week is putting it mildly; most remain unaware. Hopefully they will become aware before some journalist reports the story. Indeed, we pray that it is resolved before this happens.
I appreciate that there are legal complexities here that require lawyers and legal process. However, the parties have reached the Supreme Court stage, while the churches and delegates have had near-zero prior knowledge of the situation. That’s a problem. The Churches aren’t a third party in this dispute, but very much involved. We (the churches) are the BUV (not the Council or the College), so how can it be that things have progressed to this stage (or rather, degressed) without thorough consultation, prayer, and conversation with the churches?
Earlier this year, I learned that the BUV has already paid more than $1 million in legal fees. I now believe the figure is $2 million. In addition, Whitley College has paid a vast sum for its own legal fees. Both amounts matter because the money belongs to the Baptist family. Indeed, the land, the sale proceeds and the legal costs belong to us.
I have no doubt that all sides involved are troubled by what has transpired, but the lack of transparency is significant; the BUV is taking itself to court and only informing the family at the 11th hour.
The presenting issue is a legal one, but it is also a spiritual and moral one. Both parties are expressing concern; however, this doesn’t mitigate the situation before us. Who will be held to account? Think of what our churches could do with $2.5+ million for mission and ministry?
This is just one of many issues that need resolution.
Last year, the BUV caught attention amongst the major Victorian Christian denominations with its controversial ‘Guide for the Baptist Union of Victoria’, a document produced by the Victorian Government to inform our churches how to deal with questions of sexuality and gender in our churches. On top of that, a breakaway Baptist group calling themselves the ‘Open Baptists’ are setting up an alternative association in NSW and ACT (who formed as a response to Baptists holding a biblical view on marriage and human sexuality). In Victoria, a small group of churches wanting to remain within the BUV are also joining the progressive ‘Open Baptists’.
Whitley College has been a bone of contention among BUV churches for decades. While the College receives students from some quarters, many churches prefer to send students to evangelical colleges for training. Of note, as of this year, NSW’s Morling College has begun teaching units in Melbourne.
Is it time to clarify the role and place of the college?
Should questions be raised about Whitley’s association with the University of Divinity?
How is the Whitley Council accountable to the BUV (the churches) for its financial management?
Is it time to rethink property trust arrangements?
Many of these questions are not new, but are rooted in historical and theological disagreements that go back decades. In attempting to exist as an association with a theological tent as broad as the Pacific Ocean, it is a case about money and property that has taken us to court against ourselves.
Again, such a thing brings sadness. As someone who loves being a Baptist in Victoria and who longs for our churches faithful and growing in the gospel, something has gone seriously wrong, and now it’s out in the open. We rejoice in good things God is doing but the churches require full transparency and accountability from our agencies and councils.
One thing I am confident about is that our BUV needs and appreciates the prayers of God’s people.
It was an incredible day when, on Thursday, 9th October, it was announced that peace negotiations had been agreed between Israel and Gaza (Hamas). A 20-point peace plan proposed by President Donald Trump has started to come into effect, including the return of all hostages, both alive and dead, the withdrawal of Israeli troops to an agreed position, and the cessation of armed conflict.
‘Blessed are the peacemakers’.
These famous words started to trend on social media last Thursday. The trending media has continued into the new week as the final 20 surviving Israeli hostages were released back home yesterday.
Scenes across Israel’s streets and cities are being shown around the world, and the joy filling the Knesset from across political divides is palpable to see.
They must also be ongoing grief and trauma for many people. One can imagine this day has brought also tremendous relief, rejoicing, and hopefulness.
Even celebratory speeches by Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump contained notes of caution and qualification. The past 80 years have spoken: peace in the Middle East is hard fought and regularly disrupted by violence. Indeed, the pattern of peace and war is an ancient theme in the Promised Land.
‘Blessed are the peacemakers’.
As news broke of Hamas and Israel agreeing to peace, pockets of people in cities around the world stuck their fists in the air defiantly to protest the peace plan. It is telling when Hamas comes to the table and signs, and yet voices in Melbourne and London protest against peace. The rage and antisemitism now stifles the city streets of Melbourne to our shame. Over the weekend, a sitting Federal Senator stood in the middle of our CBD and threatened to burn down Parliament House in support of Palestine.
‘Massacre of the Innocents’ by Ruben
Drowning out that rhetoric were cries and prayers of gladness and thankfulness in many homes, synagogues, churches, and Parliamentary buildings.
I don’t wish to predict or guess what I think may or may not transpire in weeks and years to come in that ancient land. Such things are beyond my pay grade, and yours. The thought that I wish to convey here is observational and catechismal.
As people speak and share these words, ‘blessed are the peacemakers’, I wonder how many realise where these words originate? I wonder if we are conscious of the man who first uttered this beautiful and weighty phrase?
It is Jesus.
In what remains one of the most astonishing addresses ever given, the ‘Sermon of the Mount’, Jesus opened with the 8 Beatitudes, of which peacemakers is the 6th.
All eight beatitudes belong together and work together like an eight-note tonic scale. Each sounds a different pitch and yet every note relates to and belongs with the others.
“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you’
In trying to capture the near miraculous breakthrough in Israel and Gaza, people have turned to the words of Jesus, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers’.
Here is a thought experiment: If this wondrous phrase has captivated people’s hearts and imaginations, imagine knowing the man who first spoke these words? What was it in Jesus’ mind and heart that caused him to say, ‘Blessed are the peacemakers’?
What must this Jesus be like who can compose such heart-rendering and hope-bringing words?
As we read about Jesus’ life, he did more than preach fine words; he modelled them throughout his life, and went far further.
One of the names given to Jesus is the ‘Prince of peace’. The name mirrors his life mission to bring peace, to re-establish relations between God and sinful human beings. Perhaps what is most astonishing is the means by which Jesus established peace, through sacrificing his own life.
Peace is rarely free of charge. Peace is costly. Then grasp the biblical revelation that God himself was prepared to pay the cost for human iniquity and transgression.
The same Jesus, on another occasion, while preaching a sermon in Jerusalem, warned the world,
“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. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.”
The problem of evil in this world goes far deeper than social circumstances and economic opportunity; there is something that is most disturbing in the human soul. This Jesus, God the Son, went as deep as can be to reconcile and bring about peace through his atoning sacrifice.
As tenuous as the situation remains in Israel and Gaza, there is much to be thankful for today. And pray for peace for the people of Gaza and peace for the people of Israel.
My suggestion today, or challenge as it may be construed, is, if you like the phrase, blessed are the peacemakers, and you long for that to be a reality, even in your own heart, take a look at the one who’s next created the phrase. Take a look at the peace plan he has instituted.
I was catching up with one of the young guys from church this afternoon. We have been reading through Philippians together. Today, we looked at chapter 4, and as we were reading and then discussing it together, it dawned on us how striking Paul’s directives are, and how much they contrast the kind of words and ideas that we see dominating the media and online discussions every day.
Rejoice in the Lord always. I will say it again: Rejoice! 5 Let your gentleness be evident to all. The Lord is near. 6 Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. 7 And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things. 9 Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me—put it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you.”
What an antidote! What an alternative to 98% of what Christians and non-Christians alike share on their socials these days.
Doom scrolling is a thing. Doom sharing is also a thing. And algorithms are only too happy to feed these negative appetites and drag us further into the vortex of polarisation.
I follow loads of people online, Christians and atheists, left and right, and everyone in between. I have to say, it’s not pleasant out there in the cyber world (and neither is it in general life as well sometimes). There is this unhealthy, although understandable, negative undertone that is taking people hostage. Like a self-fulfilling prophecy, it is the critical spirit and judgmental tone that attracts the most attention.
Sometimes I’m reading yet another comment and I’m thinking, does this person ever think anything good, noble and encouraging? Sometimes you leave wondering, is there t nothing good happening in the world? Some Christians would have us think it’s all bad and evil, and the church is worse today than it was yesterday, and yesterday the Church was the biggest problem of all! (All these weak insipid feminised men not expressing anger with the same degree that I am feeling!…you know the posts). If your impression of Christianity is these kinds of public verbiage, I don’t blame you. Some religious voices are a constant negative tune, like an irritating cat screeching through the night. Why would we think Jesus is good when Christians are always so angry and unkind.
The thing is, there are real and really dangerous and serious issues facing our world and our country. I don’t think it’s hyperbole to suggest that we are moving toward one of the most dangerous periods in all history, and playing cricket while people go to hell is a little bit sadistic. However, and it is a BIG however, at the same time, this isn’t just the worst of times, it is always the best of times. The Gospel of Jesus remains good and true. God is changing lives and growing churches all over the world. There seems to be a growing interest in Christianity among young Aussie guys and girls. I suspect the interest is greater today than it has been for generations: this is a profound encouragement.
If I may suggest a word to Christians who find themselves online a lot, and unable to control yet another word of complaint or rage or criticism, what if we change the song list? Could you share something different for a change?
Instead of everything being triple forte and with dissonant chords, find a melody in F major where there is lyricism, beauty and goodness.
Goodness and beauty are interesting. They are complex. They are intriguing and stimulating and attractive. Can anyone deny the nobility of Bach’s Preludes and Fugues? Or the wondrous sounds of a Chopin Ballade? Or even the captivating story of many a pop ballad.
There is occasion for a requiem to be sung and there is a time for hardcore punk anger and listening to Shostakovich’s C Minor String Quartet. But they should not and must not be our constant melodic line.
Is the gospel of Jesus good news or not?
So instead of doom scrolling, remember the Lord’s goodness and rejoice and share that joy.
Instead of topping up rage with the latest daily outrage, follow Paul’s advice and focus on what is noble and beautiful and useful. Not only will this do your own soul much good, it will paint a more accurate portrait of Christ and that is surely what we want to do above everything; to show people the compelling good news of the God who saves.
Notice where Paul lands at the end of his encouragement: “the God of peace will be with you.”
How much our tumultuous world needs peace. How much our cities and streets need this Divine peace. If peace is our aim, to be at peace with God through Christ, start practising Philippians 4:4-9
I’m someone who is wary of the ‘prophetic voice’. I’m a huge believer in believing the word of the prophets, but not so much of those who attribute ‘prophetic’ to their own messaging.
A social media post this morning used the phrase as they promoted a social agenda. Yesterday, a Facebook friend did something similar. The phrase ‘prophetic voice’ has joined the pantheon of overused and misused religious phrases.
It’s troubled me for years how the language of ‘prophetic’ is used by Christians.
Maybe it’s the theological window from which I see the world, but for most of the time, the ‘prophetic voice was a phrase connected with progressive theology, as various thinkers and writers advocated for their views. The term ‘prophetic’ became a way of trying to authenticate a point of view, saying that God is behind this teaching.
ABC’s religious program, God Forbid, ran a segment in 2017 that captures the classic liberal understanding of the ‘prophetic voice’. The synopsis reads,
‘Religion and politics are supposed to be separate, but some strange magnetic force keeps pulling them back together. The “prophetic voice” in Christian tradition is supposed to speak out against the abuses of the powerful, even when they’re political leaders. But does this mean the pulpit should be a platform for political views?’
“Theological educators must be prepared to stand on the sidelines of the church and call it to account. Like those pesky prophets of old, courageous theologians call the church to be different than what it is, a challenge to a radical transformation and a critique of the status quo.”
Once one understood this pastor’s own convictions, for him, the prophetic voice stands against the mainstream evangelical faith and is either subverting or trying to win over Christians to a new way of thinking (usually a heterodox one).
Which is why I replied at the time,
‘I guess Hananiah was a prophet of sorts! Should not prophets contend for the faith, rather than contravene the faith? In fact, professionalising prophecy was the error of the kings of Israel and Judah. While God may use a voice from the college in a ‘prophetic’ way, assuming the mantle of prophet is dangerous’.
However, over more recent years, the phrase ‘prophetic voice’ (again from my window view), has been increasingly co-opted by conservative Christians to advocate a particular posture, as well as message. It’s become one of these phrases that are thrown into the mix every second day. For example, a Facebook friend yesterday suggested Canon Press speaks with a prophetic voice on today’s issues in contrast (he believes) with TGC, that doesn’t.
There are a number of problems here (not least Canon Press).
Prophetic voice has fast become a rhetorical device, employed to legitimise or bolster the view they’re trying to prove. After all, if it’s prophetic, how can we dare oppose?
Whereas theological liberals often postulated ‘prophetic’ with their progressive message, conservatives often use ‘prophetic’ in line with a certain style of voice. It’s equating the ‘prophetic’ with a particular public posturing.
It’s also reducing the role of prophet. Prophets may challenge. Prophets might also condemn. And prophets could also give a word to console and comfort. At the very least, the ‘prophetic voice’ crowd are rather narrow in what they consider prophetic.
In short, the ‘prophetic voice’, turns out to be a power play, as though the battering ram approach to public conversation is more godly and faithful than the one who knocks on the gate and asks to come inside and share? Or it’s like, if you don’t play the game my way, then you’re obviously not playing the game at all (which any sports coach and player will know is nonsense).
It’s confusing style, strategy and substance.
Tim Keller famously and so helpfully explores the space known as ‘theological vision’. Between our theological foundations and our ministry practice is this in-between hermeneutical and wisdom space where we develop strategy and approach.
In his super helpful book on Eldership, Murray Capill explains this way,
“As Keller notes, people with the same theology can have very different ministry practice. Not all churches with reformed theology, for example, worship in the same way or do youth ministry in the same way. They can have enormously differing practice, not because of a different theology but a different vision for ministry”
This is also true when it comes to Churches and Christians doing evangelism and thinking through how to communicate Christian ethics. Some Christians are quick to judge our brothers and sisters for not adopting ‘our’ particular approach to social issues. If you’re not signing petitions and making public statements, you’re viewed with suspicion. Or perhaps public silence isn’t complicity or cowardice; it may be that a local church is doing effective gospel ministry to people in their community without making a noise about it.
For example, on the topic of abortion, the Bible is clear that killing the unborn is sin, and so the moral injunction is always clear. Christians arguing otherwise are representing God as much as Hananiah. However, is there only one way to speak about affirming life and value of unborn children? Is the only approach loud condemnatory retorts? Are churches complicit in evil if they are not actively making statements in the public square? What if a group of Christians are going about loving their neighbours and supporting pregnant mums in ways that encourage them to keep their child? That’s going well beyond virtue signalling and actually doing something.
There is another question: what does ‘prophetic voice’ actually mean? How does one define a legitimate ‘prophetic voice’ and do we find biblical warrant for such a category today? What do the Scriptures teach? Does the office of Prophet even exist today? Is it big P Prophet or can there be little p prophets? That’s a whole other conversation.
I think it’s problematic when people employ the phrase to add authority to their methodology for doing public theology. We may well agree with the desired outcome and with the message, but disagree with how best to approach societal sins and problems. What ends up happening when we attach loaded language like ‘prophetic’ is that we aggravate division among gospel centred people who are otherwise dealing with and living godly lives in their particular place.
If one’s ‘prophetic’ speech creates ungospel-like division and plants seeds of suspicion in fellow Christians, it is near certain that you need to stop playing prophet.
At the very least, I’m nervous when people start attributing ‘prophetic’ to public speech because it suggests Divine authority and weight. Yes, 1 John tells us to test the spirits. And yes, as I read the Scriptures, there are clear warnings attached to those who profess to be prophets or speaking ‘prophetically’.
Returning to Canon Press as I wrap up, Jeremy Sexton wrote an excellent piece last week, ‘Doug Wilson is not a prophet’. It’s worth a read as a corollary to what I’ve just shared.
One of the largest memorial services in American history has just concluded.
Whether we approve or not, whether we are invested in the story or not, the assassination of Charlie Kirk has dominated the news cycle and continues to do so today, with his memorial service taking place in Glendale, Arizona.
The papers and social media are speaking about very little else. It’s not that this is the only thing that matters today, but there are moments in history that capture the public imagination in ways that coinciding events do not.
It’s clear that there were two narratives running through the memorial service, and we mustn’t confuse them as being the same or necessarily belonging together. I want to pull apart the politics that were present and the gospel that was also present.
Several members of the Trump administration spoke, including the President. Donald Trump gave a speech in which this line has already gone viral,
“He [Charlie Kirk] didn’t hate his opponents. He wanted the best for them – that’s where I disagreed with Charlie. I HATE my opponent and I DON’T want the best for them.
I suspect the President said these words with a certain tongue in cheek. He was bringing a moment’s levity to what was a very sombre occasion. At the same time, that does seem to be his modus operandi. But of course, Trump’s words are not his alone; this is the norm and assumed posture across religions and ideologies and politics. Whether it is fascist or anti-fascists or left or right, and most of the middle, we think ill of those who disagree with us. That the President is saying so with knowledge of the truth isn’t laughable, it’s woeful. Doubling down on hate doesn’t resolve the growing friction and factions that are disintegrating our societies. That leaves us with a game of power where the loudest, fastest and strongest aim to take charge and impose their will on the rest of us.
Trump, the ever populist and pragmatist, may well use whatever movement that helps maintain momentum. That’s a problem, as it was when previous American presidents co-opted Christian language and concepts to promote their own ethics and agendas.
On Saturday, I gave a lecture at the Reformed Theological College, where I outlined 3 principles for doing public theology:
Don’t conflate Church and state.
Don’t confuse common grace with particular grace.
Understand both the common good and the eternal good.
Christian pundits, commentators and pastors would do well and serve our congregations and the unbelieving public by recognising and practising those distinctions. Of course, the differences are not always perfectly clear and it is true that the gospel of Jesus changes every part of us, but nonetheless, we will do well to avoid those trappings. Why? In part, because the gospel is too important to be confused or co-opted by red or blue or green.
Merging the Christian faith with politics is fraught with dangers, and that’s true across the political spectrum. If you think that your particular position is exempt from that rule, that only exemplifies the very problem. It doesn’t mean every political ideology is equally true or good or respectable. Of course not. How we value the unborn really does matter. How we view migrants and the poor matters. And many other topics.
As I said earlier, two narratives were present in the memorial service, and it is the second one that I hope shines the most.
Charlie Kirk’s pastor, Rob McCoy, gave a clear presentation of the good news of Jesus. He said.
“Charlie knew … at an early age … he entrusted his life to the Savior of the World. . Jesus came to this earth, was tempted in all ways, yet was without sin, was crucified upon the cross…”
“His blood was poured out because blood must be shed for the remission of sins…And His death upon that cross was sufficient for all the world’s sins, but only efficient for those who, like Charlie, would receive Him as their Savior.”
Can we say an Amen to those words?
Erika Kirk then addressed the crowds and uttered the impossible word,
“I forgive him…I forgive him because it was what Christ did, and it is what Charlie would do.”
“The answer to hate is not hate,” she said. “The answer we know from the gospel is love and always love – love for our enemies and love for those who persecute us.”
This is the message our polarised world needs to hear. I thank God that God has not judged me according to every word I have said and every thought I have entertained. I am eternally thankful to God that he forgives sinners such as me. And grasping this gospel does something to us, where Trump’s words disappear and where love and forgiveness take shape.
What is so sad and troubling is that I know our culture well enough to see how this is going to play out in the media and social media: most people will simply double down on their prior commitments and attitudes. People are so entrenched in their ideological preferences that we will read the room as our glasses are glued onto our faces, and we are unable to see any other perspective. MAGA supporting Aussie conservatives will criticise me for my posture here and progressive Aussies will criticise me for not damning Charlie Kirk to hell alongside the President.
Reality is almost always more complicated and nuanced. One does not need to elevate Charlie Kirk to the status of Stephen (Acts 6) or label him ‘ult right’. The Christian truth is that sinners are saved by grace alone on account of the perfect sacrifice of Jesus alone. Anything else is hubris.
Here is a thought: regardless of our political leanings, if God uses the gospel preached at Charlie Kirk’s funeral to convince some people of God’s saving news through Jesus, will we rejoice or will we resent & grumble like Jonah in Ninevah?
The mystery of Christianity’s ongoing relevance in Australia continues.
Shining through the dark clouds and rain of Tokyo last night was an Australian woman. It wasn’t her winning the high jump at the Athletics World Championship that so much elevated the spotlight (as impressive as this is) but how Nicola Olyslagers pointed her praise and joy to God.
“And every time that I was jumping. It was just worship. I was like, let’s go. And so even if waiting and out there in the rain, I have such a joy because I know these moments are forever, the gold medal was the added bonus.”
She’s right, it was worship. It was worship not because her performance was outstanding (as it was) or because of her world-class athletic ability, but because Nicola Olyslagers was using her gift in delight of and for glory of God. The Apostle Paul describes the entire Christian life as a living sacrifice of worship to God. It is a life of thanksgiving and joy to and for the God who made us and whose Son gave everything for our redemption.
It’s not only the Ancient Greeks who deified their athletes. Australians raise our athletes to a bar that they, nor anyone, can measure up to, whether it’s sporting successes or their personal lives. We stick them on a mantle and throw garlands of gushing praise that would make Hercules blush.
There is something humbling and attractive when winners don’t point to themselves. How interesting it is to hear athletes directing praise not toward themselves but to God. In Western countries like Australia, we pride ourselves in the so-called decline of religion in general, and Christianity specifically. We preach how we have built an alternative society in the vein of John Lennon’s hopeless ‘Imagine’. But as we’re discovering, this secular humanism is more like Camus’ Myth of Sisyphus. Except, Sisyphus is no longer pushing the boulder uphill; it’s fast chasing him down the hill, and yet strangely Sisyphus is shouting, ‘Look at me, I’m free!’
No matter how we try to squeeze out or sanitise Jesus, he won’t be locked in a cultural box, but in so many areas of Australian life, and yes, even among our athletes, this Jesus is making an appearance. Think of Geelong’s Ollie Dempsey, who is playing in the AFL Grand Final this Saturday, or Gary Ablett Jnr, Labuschagne and a host of NRL players.
Nicola Olyslagers’ words may appear strange to many of our ears, partly because God is the idea we are trying hard to leave behind. Who needs God today? We’ve also accepted a popular myth; God is baggage that keeps us from having success and happiness. Nicola Olyslagers is one of may athletes at this year’s World Championships showing us otherwise.
It is one thing to compete for self-satisfaction or actualisation. It is another thing to represent one’s country. It is reaching beyond the stars when athletes strive and exert for the glory of God. It’s not that the last of these is the least or cancels out the love of sport and the honour of running, jumping and throwing for your country. Competing for God raises the bar, not the bar of expectation, but the bar of realised contentment and happiness.
Think of it this way, if competing for yourself brings about a certain but limited happiness, and competing for others brings a higher level of wonder, then to jump or run for God’s pleasure is the greatest pleasure of all.
“God made me fast. And when I run, I feel His pleasure,” so said Eric Liddell, the 400m gold medalist from the 1924 Paris Olympics Games.
At the 2021 Tokyo Olympic Games Nicola Olyslagers shared,
“I think as a teenager I was always an outcast; and I got welcomed into a faith community that loved me. And I just remember encountering god’s love and it changed the way I thought of myself – as a misfit why was I created so tall and stuff – and it gave me passion and purpose to use it.
“In 2017, it was my big moment when it flicked the switch and I decided to pursue God over sport.- whatever comes from sport is a bonus, but I am already complete and perfect and loved as a person regardless of it.
“That just allowed me to soar over high jump bar and not be scared anymore because I am loved and that is the most important piece.”
There are extraordinary athletes who follow Jesus, and there are extraordinary athletes who do not. This is the case in every field of endeavour. Some of the most brilliant minds in the world today are followers of Jesus, while others are not. Many of history’s most influential thinkers were professing Christians, and others not. Today, in the fields of medicine, law, science, music, film, and economics, there are men and women who profess the name of Jesus, and there are men and women who do not.
The difference doesn’t depend on a person’s intellect or effort, but in the category that is greater than all others. Neither is the distinguishing characteristic success, as though Christians are more likely to win Word Championships or unbelievers are more likely.
One of the lessons here is that you don’t need to sacrifice God for sporting achievement. You don’t need to ditch God in order to find success. We are not required to ignore God in order to find our truest self. Nicola McDermott and Sydney McLaughlin are among the many athletes who prove this myth to be false. And what these athletes have shared is a message of good news that surpasses sporting achievement. Eric Liddell who felt God’s pleasure as he raced to gold, also said this, “Many of us are missing something in life because we are after the second best.”
The Apostle Paul once wrote a letter to a young man. He used a sporting analogy to describe the greatest race worth running.
“ I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.”
You see, Christianity’s ongoing relevance in Australia isn’t a mystery. My generation may be stuck with ‘Imagine’ on repeat, but Zoomers are looking for meaning and realisation beyond the low and crumbling ceiling we call ‘self-actualisation’.
No doubt many young Aussies are dreaming about future sporting success. Many more are thinking about the future and considering the possibilities before them. We do not need to make the mistake of locking God out of life. Indeed, through Jesus Christ, he promises something of eternal meaning, joy and satisfaction. A few may eventually win a World Championship medal or AFL Grand Final, but let’s not miss out because we are after the second best.
The assassination of Charlie Kirk on 10th September will bring unspeakable grief to those who knew and loved him. His death is emblematic of the age in which we are sadly living. Not even an hour was permitted to pass without tirades of opinions and glee expressed online.
People are defending the shooter, even celebrating the murder. Many others dare to say that Charlie Kirk is simply a victim of his own making, while others again try to play the shadowy middle way game of whataboutism.
People are losing the ability and desire to talk to one another about life’s biggest issues. People enraged by hardship and perceived injustice (or real injustice) drink from the fever-inducing cup that is easily found among online socials, justifying and fuelling hatred for the other.
The city of Melbourne, every weekend it seems, now witnesses protests, vile speeches, and violence. Victorian Police are right now preparing for and dreading another day of protest on Saturday. These thousands are but a tiny few of the many more who express their anger over on Bluesky, X and Facebook.
Most people have no idea who I am and have not heard my name, and yet I have written and said enough to have my name printed in newspapers and even on the front page of The Age. The former Victorian Premier resorted to his famous slander under the Parliamentary privilege because of a view I had expressed. I have received more than a few ‘colourful’ letters in the mail or messages on the phone. As a consequence, there have been a couple of Sundays when I have had a quiet word with the Elders, just in case someone might turn up to interrupt or protest our Sunday service. Thankfully, when someone has come as a result of something I’ve written, it is in search of a merciful God and not with an agenda to shout down a preacher.
We will not find a way forward for the common good through joining in the competing choruses online; hate breeds hate, and conspiracy is often countered with misinformation. Of course, there is much going on that is maddening, harmful and concerning. Anger has a place (God can be angry), but it mustn’t be the only key in which we speak. Indeed, how we speak and what we say really does matter. Charlie Kirk, from the little I know of him, engaged his interlocutors with grace, and yet he is now dead. Far from reasoning that kindness doesn’t work, we need to double down on grace and kindness.
I have lost count over the past 5 years of how often I have seen comments from certain Christians who self-identify with the final Beatitude (blessed are the persecuted), and subsequently use this to justify relegating the first 7 Beatitudes to the category of ‘not in season’. Peacemakers and meekness and mercy are deemed an inconvenience; how differently Jesus sees things.
The Christian doesn’t need to second-guess how to respond to world events and how to engage with others. The Christian isn’t left without guidance and recourse. Jesus gives the believer a paradigm in the Beatitudes.
He said:
“Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Blessed are those who mourn, for they will be comforted.
Blessed are the meek, for they will inherit the earth.
Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they will be filled.
Blessed are the merciful, for they will be shown mercy.
Blessed are the pure in heart, for they will see God.
Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.
Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
The Beatitudes don’t detail how one enters the Kingdom of heaven, but the life of those who belong to this Kingdom. This posture in some ways pre-empts the final manifestation of the Kingdom by exhibiting its qualities in the here and now; to use Jonathan Leeman’s analogy, it’s much like an embassy in a foreign country.
Some Christians hold to some of the Beatitudes and play loose with others. Some of us focus on peace-making while sacrificing righteousness in order to achieve this goal. Some grab hold of righteousness with clenched fists, while ignoring how Jesus begins, with confession and contrition of our own sins. It is important to see how the Lord Jesus ties them together in an unbreakable bond. All 8 Beatitudes belong together and work together to build godly character and a life that imitates, albeit imperfectly, the Lord Jesus.
Jesus leads us to begin with confession and contrition, acknowledging our complete dependence on God’s grace, which is his loving gift to us through the atoning death of Christ. The more we grasp the astonishing nature of God’s grace, we can no longer look at other Aussies with any disdain or wanting anything other than their good.
I suspect some of my Christian friends believe that if we follow the first 7 Beatitudes, the outcome will be peace and happy relationships with everyone, but that’s not where Jesus leads us. He says, ‘Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.’
It is true, we can be shouted down because we’ve said stupid things, hurtful things, and said the right things wrongly; I know I’m guilty of all the above. Nonetheless, Jesus indicates that living the Beatitudes and being concerned for God’s righteousness may still result in people being offended and not liking us and attempting to silence us. For Christians to think we can escape verses 10-12 is understandable but somewhat naive.
The Christian song sheet isn’t La Marseillaise,
‘Français, pour nous, ah ! quel outrage
Quels transports il doit exciter!
C’est nous qu’on ose méditer
De rendre à l’antique esclavage!’
If the writer or website you read regularly uses language of ‘revolution’ and ‘war’, ‘taking back’, and throwing around rage and expletives, perhaps it’s time to find a more useful read. After all, Proverbs warns us,
“Do not make friends with a hot-tempered person,
do not associate with one easily angered,
or you may learn their ways
and get yourself ensnared”. (Proverbs 22:24-25)
Blessed are the poor in spirit.
Blessed are those who mourn.
Blessed are the pure in heart.
Melbourne needs Christians leaning ever closer to the Jesus of the Beatitudes. The United States and Australia need Christians who are learning to press closer to Jesus’ words, trusting him and doing as he asks. If you’re not yet convinced, then take a look at the cross. Did Jesus abandon his Beatitudes as he hung crucified? Or did he embrace them, such that he died with and for the sins of the world?
That’s the message our city and world need more than ever. That’s the life our churches need to embody more than ever.
This is a national day of action, when Australians are urged “to inspire and empower everyone to meaningfully connect with the people around them and start a conversation with those in their world who may be struggling with life.”
R U OK?
The chosen day is somewhat ironic, given the historic significance of September 11. I will never forget that night, turning on the television to watch the late-night news and seeing live footage of airplane slamming into the World Trade Centre. I was so confused that I thought I was watching a movie. But then, I understood what I was watching, the moment that killed the hubristic ‘end of history’ motif and which began to expose the tectonic plates of clashing culture and spirituality.
R U OK?
My daughter’s school has organised special events for today, to remind the kids of laughter and to teach them how to laugh. I guess, such is the despondency and anxieties capturing our society, that we need help to learn how to laugh.
R U OK?
This morning, we all woke to the horrifying news of Charlie Kirk being shot and murdered at a College event in Utah.
Once doesn’t need to agree with every view Charlie Kirk promoted, even if he was right about the things that matter most. As others testify, Kirk’s ability to listen, engage, and respond with clarity and a smile is a dying art in our polarised world.
It is a testament to his contribution to civil life that Presidents and political leaders and religious leaders alike feel the need to offer public condolences. Yes, there are the haters too, and the whataboutism pundits who ever fail to read the room. A word to the whatabout crowd, please don’t. Eliphaz, Bildad and Zophar are examples to avoid not copy.
The immediate outcry of sadness and shock is quite incredible. Reading the commentary today feels as though a black veil has descended upon America. Here in Australia, young people especially know the name Charlie Kirk. He was followed by millions, including many Gen X and millennials across Australia.
This murder further accentuates how our societies have lost the ability to communicate, disagree and debate. The appetite for hate and rage is strong, and like a virus, it is eating away at our soul. Police in Melbourne are again expressing profound concerns over proposed marches and protests that are planned for this weekend. We no longer speak to each other and seek to understand; we yell and spit and throw projectiles.
R U OK?
Many today are not ok.
Next week I’m giving an address at the Reformed Theological College in Melbourne, where I’ve been asked to speak to this topic: ‘Engaging Society: A Gospel Response.’
Without giving too much away, may I point us in the direction that God points. Ephesians 2 spells out God’s plan of peace and it is a heavenly vision designed to be experienced on earth. The full embodiment of this promised peace will have to wait for the resurrection day, but it is nonetheless a given and realised even in the middle of tumultuous times,
“But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility” (Ephesians 2:13-14)
God has announced his peace plan. With staggering undeserved grace, he paid the price for peace: the death of his only son. God’s plan of peace reconciles separated people, those separated from God and from one another. The Gospel of Jesus Christ really is the answer to all our brokenness and divisions, our frustrations and hates. Leaning ever closer to this Divine peace is the antidote. This plan will outlast and defeat every hatred and misunderstanding, every anxiety and fear.
I didn’t know Charlie Kirk, but amidst his words and views, a living faith in the risen Christ was apparent. That counts for everything.
R U OK?
I’m looking forward to this day spoken of by the prophet Micah when God’s peace covers the earth,
“Many nations will come and say,
“Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the temple of the God of Jacob. He will teach us his ways, so that we may walk in his paths.” The law will go out from Zion, the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
He will judge between many peoples and will settle disputes for strong nations far and wide. They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore.
Everyone will sit under their own vine and under their own fig tree, and no one will make them afraid, for the Lord Almighty has spoken.”
MurrayCampbell.net 