Bible

Australia needs to look deeper to find ‘social cohesion’

/ MurrayCampbell

Can’t we just get along?

In the 1970 film ‘Waterloo’, a British soldier’s cries are heard over the din of battle, ‘how can we kill one another…how can we? Why do we? Why? Why?…”

Why can’t Australians all get along?

Hatred and discord are woven into the human condition. The original imago dei didn’t contain such stains, but ever since the Great Fall,  humanity has carried and desired personal gain through demeaning the other and yes, even through bloodletting. The history of the world is less peace interrupted by violent moments, as it is, continued iniquity that finds momentary rest by the grace of God.

Almost everyone is talking about the State of Australia. The massacre of Jews at Bondi Beach on December 14th has forced us to ask questions that most Aussies are ill equipped to even frame, let alone answer with resolve. There is widespread shock, there is tremendous grief, along with anger, fear and yes, and still with much gaslighting. 

Can’t we as a society just get along? 

Clearly the answer is no. It should be yes, and I imagine the average Aussie longs for the answer to be yes, but we are falling far short of this thing called, ‘social cohesion.’

There are three simple observations that I wish to make here. They are not new or novel. Others are far better qualified than myself to speak to this topic. And even here, many of my words are ones that I’ve previously offered up in public discourse.

The 3 points that I wish weave together are these:

  1. Government can’t bear the weight of creating social cohesion. 
  2. Take note of the scholarly work of Christopher Watkin. He has much wisdom to offer on the subject.
  3. Come home to Christianity. 

One year ago and a week before Christmas, the Victorian State Government proposed ‘social cohesion’ laws. A watered down version of the Bill was adopted by Parliament in April 2025. At the time I suggested that ‘social cohesion’ when it’s attached to government and to laws has a touch of the Machiavellian about it. One doesn’t know whether to think it’s more like George Orwell or Monty Python! 

No doubt this is a testing time for any government. There are pressures applied from all kinds of directions, and at times this leads to inaction or delayed resolve. As we have seen for more than 2 years now, this has given more oxygen to antisocial, and especially, antisemitic voices and violence. Antisemitism is an indignant on the moral and spiritual state of Australia.

Australia has never been heaven. We have never been ther perfect country, but we have witnessed developments over the past decade that are injurious and bring grief to many. We are less peaceful than we were. We are less inclusive and kind. There is more personal and social distress and with little sign of a turnaround. This is evident across the country, but Melbourne is Australia’s protest capital (not a title to boast about). Ever since 2020, when the government turned a blind eye to certain marches while slamming others, every Jane, Nguyen, and Bob has seen fit to grind city streets to a halt. Not a week goes by without banners and angry faces blocking traffic. 

According to the Bible, from which we owe the fundamental notions of civil society, governments have a responsibility to protect its citizens and to punish evil doers (Romans 13:1-6). This requires the careful and just creation of laws and their reasonable enforcement. It’s not a coincidence that the Apostolic framing of Government responsibilities is accompanied with an injunction for citizens to pay taxes. The purpose of taxation is largely tied to enabling government to do this  double edged sword duty of protecting and punishing effectively.

Government inaction is no longer an option. Thankfully NSW’s Premier, Chris Minns, seems to realise this and is moving beyond empty rhetoric and thin pieces of legislation. Even a Muslim Mayor in Western Sydney has taken decisive action to close a hate factory where one of the gunmen was fed his lies about Jewish people.

We have too long sacrificed cohesion at the altar of diversity. Diversity, properly defined is a beautiful thing which adorns a healthy society. I thank God for the tapestry of multi-ethnicism that has given strength and flavour and wonder to Australia. But as we have deconstructed big T Truth and other axioms, we have lost the ability to acknowledge that some ideas are counter productive and even dangerous.  We can practice pluralism while recognising not every worldview is equally valid or good.

If we think that our society is beyond and above 1928 Germany, we are suffering from a greater dose of egomania than I thought.

How can the Federal Government not call for a Royal Commission to investigate the terrorist attack at Bondi Beach on December 14? This wasn’t an isolated event, but the culmination of more than two years of government sitting on their hands while Jewish Australians were attacked in their synagogues and cafes and homes. And while genuine hatred was proclaimed and promoted on our city streets every week. As Stephen Mcalpine has noted, there is a directed line from the Sydney Opera House to Bondi Beach. 

Even the slaughter of 15 Jews at Bondi Beach hasn’t been enough to completely silence the keffiyeh wearing mafia. So much whataboutism and justifying and excusing continues even before the bodies of the slain were laid to rest. Of course,  their right handed sibling, neo nazism with men in black, is equally a scourge on our society.

While Governments must taken action against anti-semitism, Government action is not suffice. I’m not suggesting some kind of community vigilanteism; please no. But everyday Aussies are responsibile for their own words and actions and setting an example to others and demonstrating the power of kindness and grace and generosity over hatred and intolerance and selfishness. Of course we must be intolerant towards views that breed hatred toward Jewish people and views that dehumanise the other. That we need laws to demand ‘decent behaviour’ communicates how far our society has strayed. Churches need to take a lead in this, by teaching and practicing what is in accord with the Christian faith. I still cannot fathom how one Melbourne Anglican Minister in 2023 excused Hamas’ slaughter in Israel. Such disgusting commentary should be held to account.

As the Victorian Government proposed their ‘social cohesion’ laws last Christmas, I expressed discomfort at the language of ‘social cohesion’, and I remain uncomfortable. I get it; they are ‘trying’ to address a specific problem without naming the elephant in the room. Why not call it ‘Rules for Safe Protests’ or something like that?

The reason why I’m uncomfortable about the Government’s language of ‘social cohesion’ is because the task of social cohesion doesn’t belong to the government, but to the people. When government sees itself as the answer to every social ill and when the people demand government to fix every crisis, we are obfuscating personal responsibility and creating systems of governance that cannot bear the weight of such responsibility. 

This is one area where the work of Dr Christopher Watkin is worthy of consideration. Monash University’s Dr Watkin articulates a positive and important work on contract theory. He says, 

“Civil society is sometimes the neglected dimension of the social contract, the “missing middle” as it has been called. We have a tendency to jump straight from government and law to the individual.

These civil society relationships across different visions of the good are a glue that holds our social contract together.”

From his book, Biblical Critical Theory, 

‘the vague and sporadic measures taken by contemporary governments to shore up the social contract with well-meaning but half-hearted attempts at “civic edu- cation” have little effect, when all the while billions of advertising dollars and a destructive paradigm of competition in all areas of society expertly catechize individual consumers to be little predisposed to the civic duties a strong social contract requires. No rewriting of the social contract can be complete without giving serious attention to its cultural and liturgical infrastructure.’

We will do well to engage with Dr Watkin’s material closely and carefully. There is much goodness and valuable ideas to be found. Here is one lecture he gave recently on the subject.

No Government is up for the job, and it’s not designed to be. Part of the problem embedded in any Government setting the rules for social cohesion is that this is never a natural space. This is one of the heresies attached to secularism. Secular is certainly preferable to Sharia Law and to Christian Nationalism, but it is no more epistemologically and morally neutral. Secular is the sum of the worldviews present in and controlling the moral impulses of the day.

There are wonderful pockets of social cohesion is found in all kinds of places and communities across our State. There are sporting clubs and men’s sheds, and there are temples and synagogues. It is certainly experienced in local churches.

Churches are frequently more culturally diverse than the communities surrounding them. Where I have the privilege of serving and belonging, we have people from China and Uganda, families from Vietnam and India, Nigeria and Columbia. Young and old mix together, single and married are friends and serve one another. Of course, Churches have their failings and blindspots, (after all, the very point of Christianity is that there is only one perfect saviour and we’re not him!), and yet there is profound togetherness and other person-centredness. 

The Victorian Government accompanied its Social Cohesion directives with expanding anti-vilification laws. Religious groups were understandably concerned such new laws will tighten the noose of faith groups from teaching and practising in accordance with their convictions; history is a strong indicator. It’s amazing how often over the last 10 years Victoria has assumed the bishopric role when Christian praxis hasn’t supported their social agendas. There is a mine of irony in Victoria where Government identifies a growing social disorder and yet clamps down on one of the few societal groups who are truly exhibiting positive social health and life. If we are interested in civil society, maybe we ought to return to the worldview that created the ideas and values from which this vision derives: Christianity. 

Not every religion is equal. Not every idea is equally valid,  and assuming so will only give licence to the kind of behaviour that is all to common now in our city streets. And yet we must delver deeper than legislative reforms. No, I don’t support the idea of a State religion. Religious freedoms and pluralism is a Christian idea for Christianity isn’t something to be gained via Government guidelines and laws. Christianity is grounded grace not law. Without irony however, it is the Christian message that cdreates the space and gives air to the art of persuasion and serving others through disagreement. It is, for example, because Christians believe Jesus is the only way to God that we don’t want Governments legislating religious doctrines. There are however religious and irreligious teachings which contradict basic ideas of social freedom and respect of life and dignity of fellow Australians.

This is one reason why we are losing something precious by running away from the Bible and the God the of the Bible. It’s not something for Government to oversee, this is something the people have largely lost and would do well to come home to. The Scriptures that Jews and Christians alike believe, teach that we must love God with all our being and love our neighbour. Jesus insisted, 

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’There is no commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31)

We must love our neighbours. We ought respect and reach out to our Jewish neighbours. We should show kindness to our Muslim neighbours. Law and legislation is a necessary weapon, but the bigger antidote to seeing real and heart transformation requires something more.

Two days ago we celebrated Christmas, the ultimate day of truce-making, although that first holy night was filled with peril. Nonetheless, the hope born that night in Bethlehem really is the only hope we have today. Come, check out a local church and see that hope in action. Let me leave you with the great Messianic promise of Isaiah for he is breathtaking,

‘The people walking in darkness

    have seen a great light;

on those living in the land of deep darkness

    a light has dawned.

You have enlarged the nation

    and increased their joy;

they rejoice before you

    as people rejoice at the harvest,

as warriors rejoice

    when dividing the plunder.

For as in the day of Midian’s defeat,

    you have shattered

the yoke that burdens them,

    the bar across their shoulders,

    the rod of their oppressor.

Every warrior’s boot used in battle

    and every garment rolled in blood

will be destined for burning,

    will be fuel for the fire.

For to us a child is born,

    to us a son is given,

    and the government will be on his shoulders.

And he will be called

    Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,

    Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

Of the greatness of his government and peace

    there will be no end.

He will reign on David’s throne

    and over his kingdom,

establishing and upholding it

    with justice and righteousness

    from that time on and forever.

The zeal of the Lord Almighty

    will accomplish this.’

The ‘Prophetic Voice’

/ MurrayCampbell

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?’

I’m accustomed to this usage of ‘prophetic language.’ For example, in 201,6 I responded to a Melbourne Baptist who claimed this role for the local Baptist college, 

“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.

Would you sell out Jesus for $4.37 billion?

/ MurrayCampbell

‘What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? ‘

“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”

Nah, ‘surely not’, says the entrepreneur hungry for another dollar. As long as there is commerce, trade, and ingenuity, people have contended Jesus is wrong. You can have riches and God. You can have wealth and religion.

Why choose between the two? Can’t we have both, Jesus and a growing portfolio? Perhaps not $4 billion; let’s drop it down to a more reasonable $4 million, enough to live comfortably but not so much that my face and portfolio are splashed in The Australian.

It’s an Aussie dream story: success, celebrity status, and a partnership with Ferrari.  Wouldn’t we follow these steps given the chance? 

The Gospel of Luke tells the occasion when a young influencer makes a pitstop in front of Jesus while on the way to the Grand Prix (yes, there’s a touch of creative licence in this storytelling, but the point remains the same). Careful not to step his $1200 sneakers in a puddle beside the road, he approached Jesus. He was impressed by the man of Nazareth. This Jesus had a way with words and what he touched turned into something amazing. Jesus is useful. 

This young dude introduced himself and spoke respectfully to Jesus. He may be young, but he was already enjoying his prosperity. He was going places, but there was this nagging question lurking at the back of his head: did he have it all?

So he asked Jesus, ‘“Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

Jesus then went through a list, spelling out the requirements of God’s law: Don’t murder, don’t commit adultery, and so on.

This pleased the man because he felt pretty solid on those grounds. But then Jesus went where the man did not want to go: his heart. 

“You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

“When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

Wealth remains one of the world’s great con jobs. It promises happiness and success and adventure and respect, and yet it is among the worst of addictions. Wealth can be obtained through family and through hard work. Many creative geniuses have made discoveries or invented new technologies that benefit society and have made a fortune through the process. Others have made millions through theft or deceit. And then there is gambling. 

Laurence Escalante is Australia’s 32nd wealthiest person, with a personal fortune of $4.37 Billion.  There is a feature story in today’s The Australian, with Laurence Escalante sharing his rags-to-riches journey, and from religion to Los Vegas. 

Laurence Escalante grew up in a religious family, first attending a Catholic Church and then joining a large Pentecostal Church in Perth. Speaking to John Stensholt, he said,

“At the time I was very much into faith and religion. I was an acolyte”.

Apparently, Escalante has previously served as a church treasurer and started a Christian gaming company. In the vein of typically cringey Christian products, Escalante made video games based on Timothy and Titus, where players venture not to shoot all the bad guys, but to share the good news. 

He left this debt-inducing business and subsequently started a new and massively successful business: casino games.

I’m interested in the way John Stensholt writes. Even he, a journalist, can sense the clash of worlds between Escalante’s Christianity and his worldly lifestyle. The article begins, 

“If things had gone according to plan, Laurence Escalante would have had a career developing Christian computer games based on the Apostle Paul’s disciples, Timothy and Titus.

It may have been a decent earner, but it’s unlikely to have brought the level of success the 43-year-old has quickly attained in a decidedly less pious way and allowed him to live what is – judging from his social media accounts – quite the hedonistic lifestyle.”

And notice the headline, Saint to sinner? Or just a migrant kid who can now afford a jet. Even the editors can spot the scam.

Instead of bringing the good news of Jesus to the cyber world, Escalante is now making billions from the credit of the greedy and the foolish and the vulnerable. Stensholt can spot the contradiction, as can many a reader, but what about Escalante? 

It would be interesting to hear how Laurence Escalante squares this with Jesus.

The podcast episode accompanying the article is tagged, ‘Guided by God to an online gambling fortune’. I’m not sure whether this is Escalante’s personal view or it’s an editorial interpretation. Either way, it’s not true.  Can you imagine, ‘Guided by God to commit adultery’ or Guided by God to steal from my neighbour’? Neither can I.   But how often do we reconfigure God in order to justify the life decisions we are making, regardless of what God has actually said (take a look at the Bible).

He wants to assure readers,

“While admitting he isn’t as religious as he once was, Escalante insists he is no sinner. He reckons he doesn’t worry about his reputation, and says he is simply revelling in success earned from hard work and learning from previous business failures.

“I’m having fun, enjoying life,” he says in a rare interview. “Being in the moment. I’ve always been that sort of person, [wanting] to enjoy life.

“I was always into cars; I just didn’t have the means to enjoy them. Now I can afford a jet … You have to enjoy life. You never know when it could disappear.”

Nowhere does Jesus say we can’t have fun in life and enjoy ourselves. But chasing the good life without God is like investing in counterfeit money and pouring your life savings into a scam. Are you running on a high? Sure, until reality hits home. 

‘Those who trust in their riches will fall, but the righteous will thrive like a green leaf.’ (Proverbs 11:28)

‘Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle.’ (Proverbs 23:5)

It is one thing to have wealth and it is another thing to consider how to be good stewards of our wealth. And it is an altogether different moral category when exploring by what means we accumulate our wealth. 

But why choose between the two? Can’t we have both, Jesus and a growing portfolio? It’s an Aussie dream story: success, celebrity status, and a partnership with Ferrari.  Wouldn’t we follow in his steps given half the chance? Before we throw the first cricket ball at Escalante, we might do well to consider our own hearts.

That’s the thing, Laurence Escalante is a God to riches story, and the appeal is strong. It’s easy to throw stones at this billionaire but what if we share his spiritual DNA? He’s simply succeeded where many more Aussies dream. Human nature hasn’t changed over thousands of years, and Jesus’ words are as sharp and confronting today as they were 2 millennia ago. We all too easily sell the soul for a few years of splashed excess.

Gambling is one of Australia’s favourite evils. We gamble in greater numbers than nearly every other nation on earth. We know it’s harmful. We know it destroys lives and families, and yet from Government to Sport, we’ve created this entanglement where we require gambling to sustain community projects and our appetite for a high standard of living.

To be clear, Escalante’s online casino games are illegal in Australia (from what I gather); he makes his money mostly from customers in the United States and in smaller countries like Malta. 

Gambling is about playing on your hope through chance. It’s playing the odds as a means to change your life circumstances. Like every good addiction, gambling promises much and lies like porn. It exploits vulnerable people and strips them of further dignity, security and relationships. 

If Escalante believes Jesus is okay with his billions, I urge him to think again. 

How different is Jesus’ approach? Jesus isn’t utilitarian. He counted the cost. He chose sacrifice, even atonement for the sins of many. Jesus didn’t exploit the poor, he gave his life as a ransom for many. Instead of mingling with Melbourne’s celebrity culture over caviar and champagne at the Grand Prix, Jesus picked up the pieces left behind and gave life. He welcomed the humble and repentant, whether rich or poor. 

That’s part of the problem, isn’t it? We want everything. How often are we told that we deserve everything? We create a list of desires and expect God to contribute, as though he owes us. It may not be a $ amount or material possessions, but likability or recognition or career success. What kind of screwed-up view of God that is. The very premise is mistaken. We neither deserve everything nor can we. If we treat Jesus like the non-essential extra to life, then not only do we miss out on Jesus, but in the end we’ll lose the lot. 

What does Jesus tell us, 

‘For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me and for the gospel will save it.  What good is it for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul?  Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?  If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels.” (Mark 8:35-38)

But what would Jesus know?

20 Lessons from 20 years of Pastoral Ministry

/ MurrayCampbell

‘after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe—as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow.’

20 years ago today I was inducted as Pastor of Mentone Baptist Church. I won’t lie, it feels like 20 years! Our 3 children have literally grown up in the church. Prior to 2005, Susan and I had spent several years preparing for this scenario.  I had always loved serving in my local church, although I had zero desire to move into pastoral ministry. It turned out that God had other plans. My pastor at Camberwell Baps was gracious enough to give me opportunities to teach the Bible; that idea of speaking and sharing God’s words with people got my heart pumping. But an immature 19 year old, is just that, an immature 19 year old! After finishing uni and getting married, Susan and I moved to London and then to Sydney, for training and gaining experience in churches, so that we could return to Melbourne and serve Christ here.

We returned to Melbourne from our place of exile and started at Mentone Baptist Church on February 6 2005.

I’ve wrestled with this for the past week, should I say something about the 20 years or not. I guess it is an anniversary of sorts. As some readers will be aware, I’m someone who writes more than a few words.  Through this blog and writing for both Christian and secular publications, I enjoy talking about the gospel and trying to help others think through issues from the lens of scripture. I also love talking about music and cricket, and sharing with friends what my kids are up to and all their latest adventures.  Talking about myself, isn’t something I generally do (leaving aside the compulsory self-effacing sermon jokes). I am conscious about not making Murray Campbell the topic of somethingness.  It’s hard enough to see Jesus clearly, without my oddities standing in the way!

It was only this morning, as I read my Bible and read those verses in 1 Corinthians 3, that I decided, maybe I’ll put a few thoughts together. Maybe there is something I have learned from serving one church for 20 years that might be helpful to pastors elsewhere. Although, the last impression I want to suggest is that pastoral ministry is about the pastor. I’m not looking for praise (or the inverse!).  And serving in the same church for 20 years doesn’t make the work any more or less important than pastors who only serve a few years.  I’m also aware of how every church differs in some ways, and that means my particular experiences aren’t identical to a pastor who is serving in Mildura or Maroochydore. Then again,  every minister of the Gospel shares the same Bible,  the same mission and message, so perhaps similarities and parallels are not so few and far apart.

Here are 20 lessons that I have learned over 20 years of serving at Mentone Baptist Church. It’s not as though I didn’t believe or was unaware of many of these lessons prior to coming to Mentone. And it’s not as though I’ve reached the apex for these 20 themes.  Most things in the Christian life are repetitive and a day by day process of sanctification. I’m not planning to provide detailed explanations and examples for these 20 lessons, but rather to note them in passing. 

1. I still have much to learn.

I am often amazed at how little I know and how little I understand of the Scriptures and I’m excited at the prospect of continuing to dig deeper and discover more wonders of God in his word.

I’m still learning how to Shepherd a local church. Our Elders are currently reading Andrew Heard’s provocative book, Growth and Change, and am enjoying discussing penetrating questions about ministry and mission. It’s great. I love how the elders (and church) want to keep moving forward in the Gospel and to be more effective in seeing God’s Kingdom growing.

2. God answers prayer. 

He really does. When the church has prayed, we have seen God work. Which begs the question, why do we pray so little?

3. God’s Gospel is powerful. 

Just last year, our church heard testimonies and witnessed baptisms where the reality of Jesus Christ compelled and changed people’s lives. We have more planned in the early part of 2025. It is so strange to me to hear of churches smudging or avoiding clear and faithful presentation of the Gospel, as though that’s the best strategy for faithfulness and growth.  So weird. 

4. I’m still learning patience. 

I like to run fast but there’s little point sprinting if the church isn’t ready. Sometimes though, I could probably encourage our leaders and members to walk a little faster!

5. God’s word really is beautiful and true and complete. 

At Mentone, we use the Bible lots and we want to present God’s words in a way that reflects the treasure that it is. How amazing it is that God has given us a living word that speaks truth and grace today. That’s why we have 2 bible readings every Sunday morning and why we make sure our ministries, from Sunday school to youth group and 1-1 discipleship involve opening, reading and living out his word

6. People will hurt you (and at times you’re no saint either)

Learning to process hurt isn’t quick or easy. Having trusted and godly leaders is really important for working through these times.

7. I’m more convinced about the value of having a plurality of leaders.

The eldership hear me talking about this all the time. We want to grow the number of elders.  A church needs a plurality of leaders: from pastors and elders, to deacons, and all kinds of lay ministry leaders. Paul didn’t lay out a paradigm in Ephesians 4 for us to ignore!

8. Make sure the eldership consists of godly men who share a broad breadth of personality, experience and skills.

A church requires greater wisdom than that of one pastor. However, we insist that there is profound and convinced agreement and unity on the church’s doctrine and direction.

9. Trying to set an example for others is hard. 

 The Bible says that pastors ought to set an example of life and godliness for the believers. It’s a balancing act, trying to share and show how I live outside the pulpit and yet doing so without handing out an autobiography each week. 

10. Don’t do everything. 

Set early and clear expectations and boundaries and be okay with saying ‘no’. Teach your congregation to be okay in hearing, ‘no’. 

11. Membership really is important.

I believed this 20 years ago, and as the years have progressed I’ve become more convinced.  Expressive individuals is a scourge on churches and hamstrings Gospel witness and effectiveness. Jesus meant every word when he said,  “Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Want to impact the world for Jesus? Then join a church and love the saints. 

12. I will make mistakes and that’s ok.

13. The fear of losing people is common, but not dealing with problems generally makes the situation worse.

14. Technology is a curse. 

Ok, not entirely. Tech is both good and bad, a useful servant and a terrible master. As technology changes, churches will often adopt and adapt and yet we also need to be wise in its use. Too often churches begin paying a cost without first thinking through behavioural changes that come about through smart phones or AI. Hey, even schools are now recognising these dangers!

I remember Carl Trueman suggesting once that the invention of the car changed people’s behaviours in ways that negatively impacted the local church.  Cars are great, what a blessing it is to be able to move about easily and speedily. Cars give people more freedom and as Trueman explains, people started taking long weekends and pursuing more activities, and this turn impacted church attendance and participation. In other words, the car impacted the ministry and mission of the local church and does so even today.

15. We still need to cultivate a better culture of disciple making. 

We talk about it and preach on it and we practice it in all kinds of ways, but I think we are yet to be  convinced of how important discipleship is to the health and maturity of church. 

16. Repetition is key to cultural change (thinking of point 14).

I’m learning that I need to say the same thing over and over again, and when I’ve done that, I need to repeat it again.  I’m also trying to encourage our leaders to press repeat so that messages sink in and therefore lead to changed expectations or behaviours or whatever it is we’re trying to move forward. 

Part of the issue isn’t reluctance from people, but leaders remembering that people live busy lives and their heads aren’t in the church 24//7 as mine is. 

17. Church history is amazing and it matters. 

I don’t need to be sold on history. I’ve always enjoyed reading history books and watching documentaries, even as a 3-year-old kid. I studied history at Melbourne University. 

Many years later, I am more persuaded that churches should appreciate and understand that who we are today is the result of the sacrifices, thinking, preaching and lives of the saints from old. Churches make mistakes,  take wrong turns, and lean into theological mess because we haven’t learned the lessons of church history.  

We ran a course last year on Reformation history and this year we are talking about the Council of Nicaea. 

18. Protecting my day off was a great idea.

 Pastoral ministry isn’t just a job, it is a way of life. Family is family and church is also family. This makes setting boundaries often murky and imprecise. Susan and I have always wanted our children to view church as a family, and yet we never wanted to sacrifice them at the altar of ministry. I’m thankful for the clear and flexible boundaries that Susan and I set together and which the church embraced.

19. Theological liberalism is an easy gospel enemy to spot, but there is an emerging conservatism that we need to be aware of and keep away from the church.

Christian Nationalism which conflates common grace with the Gospel, and Church with State, is a growing concern not only in the United States but also in segments of Australian Churches.

This isn’t a biggy at Mentone Baps, but knowing this flavoured heresy is gaining popularity in some circles, I have already begun talking about these issues in sermons and discipleship (and of course on this blog). The Gospel is neither left nor right. Our mission isn’t defined by a side of politics, but by the Lordship of Christ and his Gospel that brings the forgiveness of sins. 

20. There is so much work do to.

When all is said and done, the most pressing issue today remains the eternal state of people in light of the coming judgement of God. How many millions of people in Melbourne may know their left hand and right but are oblivious to Christ the judge and Christ the redeemer?

Pastoral ministry is the worst job in the world. Pastoral ministry is the best job in the world. I get to see and be part of people’s highest and lowest moments of life, to share their joys and sorrows. Pastors have the terrifying responsibility to preach the full counsel of God and dare suggest, see my life and follow my pattern of living. And we do, knowing that God will hold us to account for how we have shepherded his people. It really is a work that people should avoid and embrace.

I don’t spend a lot of time looking back over the years. To be honest, if you asked me for particular highlights in any given previous year, I may not be able to tell you with any precision. When I do reflect on the 20 years, I do so with some embarrassment and also much thankfulness: for Susan and my children, for a church that was patient and kind and who looks after the staff so well, and for God who never lets us down.

Mentone’s current associate pastor, Mike Veith has now been with us for 14 years in this role (and as a student pastor for 2 years before then), so that’s a milestone for which I am thankful.

I realise that 20 years in one church sounds a little bit unusual, but I know pastors who have served their churches for a great deal many more years.  I think of Philip Calman from whom I learned so much during my 4 years at Chatswood Baptist as a student. He has been serving as their senior pastor for 28 years and counting. Praise God!

These are 20 of the lessons I’m learning from my 20 years at Mentone Baptist Church. There are many others, but perhaps among this this 20 there is something that might strike a note or encourage another pastor in their work for the Lord.

Sola Deo Gloria

What I think about Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde’s sermon to President Trump

/ MurrayCampbell

President Trump and Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde have run into each other for a second time. The first occasion was outside St John’s church in Washington DC, this time it is inside the National Cathedral.

In 2020, Donald Trump stood outside St John’s building following an arson attack the previous night. He held a Bible aloft. The bishop criticised Trump for standing on church property and organising a photo op. 

I suggested at the time…

“A friend of mine noted the irony of this chosen site for politico-religious vanity. Outside St John’s, the cameras took photos of a President who does not believe the Scriptures nor does he practice what they teach. Inside St John’s Church, there are clergy who also do not believe or practice the Scriptures. St John’s Church and the presiding bishop of Washington are known for their errant views about Christianity. Both inside and out, they treat the Bible with disdain.”

Yesterday, at the Inauguration Prayer Service in Washington DC, the Episcopalian Bishop of Washington delivered a 15 minute sermon in front of and toward President Donald Trump.

Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde spoke of national unity, prayer and action.

The sermon has gone viral and become headline news around the world, as the Bishop no doubt knew would be the case when speaking truth to power. Had the Bishop spoken of support for the President, few would have been interested, but standing up to Donald Trump is global news!

The lines that grabbed attention were the bishop’s call for mercy and compassion toward illegal immigrants and  LGBT children.

Unsurprisingly the reception of her sermon is divided largely between the political divide (which is probably a clue that there is something amiss in the sermon). There are also many Christians lauding her address. Might I suggest that we stop and pause and consider a few things first. 

I don’t have a problem with preachers calling for compassion and mercy. How can we not when we have understood God’s exquisite compassion and mercy toward us in Christ. The problem I have with the sermon is that while Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde uses some Bible language and invokes God’s name, what she means by these words is often quite different from what the Bible is saying. If a pastor’s sermon fits neatly into a political convention (regardless of political side), I want to suggest that there is possibly something skewed.

I have listened to her sermon in its entirety. The bishop communicates well and clearly (and quite differently from the viral videos of her deriding the President on other occasions). Yes, she uses Christian language and some Bible categories. But even within this sermon, there are giveaway signs of the troubling theology that underpins her views. For example, she makes the claim that all religions believe in the inherent dignity and worth of all people (which is not the case) and then suggests these many religions somehow represent and find origin in ‘our one God’.  Really?  And then, where was the Gospel? A bishop chooses to speak ‘truth’ to power and leaves out the Gospel?

As listeners we’ve all done it; we hear a Christian word spoken and our brains translate it in the way we understand the language and therefore we assume they are saying what we believe. That’s not always the case. Let’s not be ignorant and assume that this particular cleric means by these words what the Bible explains. That is not the case. This is made obvious by one example that she gives in her sermon in regard to LGBT people.

Christians ought (indeed, necessarily) to show kindness and love to people regardless of their sexuality and gender. I’m not mocking the idea of mercy, we need more mercy. Railing against contemporary sexual ethics, Christians can sometimes neglect to speak and exhibit Christ-like kindness. But is it compassionate to affirm or call good what God calls sinful? Is it compassionate to reject a creational paradigm and pretend that gender is fluid and that men can be women and vice versa?

A slightly different question, although relevant to the situation at hand, can we separate Donald Trump from the idea that there are only two genders? Yes, we can. His Presidency does not own the definition of gender however it is repudiating an immoral and harmful notion that’s become normalised in the academy and in pop culture, and that is, gender is fluid and cascading with options and possibilities.. Both Bible and biology communicate that we are made male or female. This is a wonderful blessing and common good, and distorting this is producing all kinds of problems, and incredible harm, especially among children. 

It is possible and indeed biblical to both affirm 2 genders and show compassion. Affirming the two genders should not diminish the fact that there are also boys and girls, men and women who find themselves in a distressing place where they are not comfortable within their biological body; they do require compassion.  Is this what the Bishop means? Previous teachings and statements by the bishop points in a different direction, and that what she means is the full affirmation of current sexual ethics, as though current gender theories are moral goods and even Christian-like. That’s a problem.

The heart of the Gospel of compassion and mercy is Christ’s substitutionary death on the cross. The Bishop could have taken the President there, but I note, this is something Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde repudiates. She says of penal substitutionary atonement, that it is “justifiably offensive”. That’s a big problem because God’s rich mercy toward us centres on Christ who bore the punishment for our sins in our place. That’s the good news of the Gospel: God forgives and reconciles and treats us not as our sins deserve because of the atonement. 

Not only this, but God’s mercy toward us in Christ does not leave us in our sins but transforms us in the power of the Holy Spirit.

This story of the Bishop Curry so-called ‘love’ sermon at Prince Harry’s and Meghan Markle’s wedding several years ago. Christians were enthralled by the smiling Bishop who spoke of love. But his message had very little to do with God’s love but preaching a Hollywood version of love and grinning while persecuting churches in his diocese for holding onto the Bible.  It’s probably of no coincidence that Bishop Curry wrote the forward for Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde’s recent book, ‘Receiving Jesus: The Way of Love’!

Christian, please don’t praise this Episcopalian Bishop as though her speech represents the Christian message. She may use Bible language at times but what she means is often quite different to what the Bible means. That doesn’t mean we are siding with Donald Trump or affirming Republican or Democrat. That’s part of the problem that we’re buying into in this fractious age.

The thing is, we don’t have to choose between President Donald Trump or Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde. I sense that sometimes we are choosing sides based more on our political preferences or social leanings rather than being guided by Scripture and the Gospel. This is happening among both left and right leaning Christians, and it’s a problem. We need to recognise that as sojourners and aliens, the Christian will often not sit comfortably at the table of power or public discourse. Sometimes we are going to be left on the bench, not choosing either side but instead taking a less popular and more lonely position. Why? Because both doctrine and life require us to take that harder route.

There is often little gospel advancement when Christians jump into bed with any political party. We may find favour with one group and then leave everyone else the impression that to be Christian is to be left or to be right,  Republican or Democrat, Liberal or Labour. That’s not to suggest that all politicians are equal or that every policy is good for society or that we Christians don’t speak truth to power.

Christians will and can disagree over many Government policies. Read Prof Sarah Irving StoneBraker’s excellent new volume, Priests of History. Even when it comes to immigration (an ideal that I value and thank God for), public safety and social cohesion do matter as do compassion and mercy. It’s one reason why we need to pray for our political leaders, for their task isn’t easy.

My point here though is not to dissect American policies but caution Christians against buying into this political and cultural partisanship that has become normalised in places like America and Australia. President Trump is not the Messiah and the Bishop is not representing God; both such notions are folly. Whether you are an evangelical praising Trump’s ascendancy or an Episcopalian disguising progressive politics behind Christian language, are we presenting the beauty and goodness and power of the gospel or simply adding to the confusion? At stake is not an election cycle or the West Wing, but the judgment seat of God and eternity. 

Additional Note (January 24):

A few people have asked, how do we know that the bishop was using Bible words in non Bible ways. In the article I’ve already cited some examples, but here are more,

The Cathedral service included prayers offered by other religions, including a Muslim call to prayer. Such things are anathema to a Christian Church. 

Lest we think this is a one-off, in 2021 the National Cathedral invited Max Lucado to preach. Washington Episcopalians went into meltdown. Read what the Dean of the Cathedral, Randolph Marshall Hollerith, said, 

“When we only engage with those with whom we agree on every issue, we find ourselves in a dangerous (and lonely) place…That means this cathedral, and this pulpit, are big enough and strong enough to welcome pastors, rabbis, imams, clergy of every faith.”

Hollerith then apologised to angry Anglicans, ‘In my straight privilege I failed to see and fully understand the pain he has caused. I failed to appreciate the depth of injury his words have had on many in the LGBTQ community. I failed to see the pain I was continuing. I was wrong.”

Bishop Mariann Budde also apologised, saying, ‘”I made you feel at risk and unwelcome in your spiritual home.’

There it is, Budde believes that a Bible believing preacher is a danger to her Diocese, while a Muslim Iman in the pulpit is not.

I realise some Christians maintain that Mariann Budde is offering a prophetic voice, but seriously? She is no more prophetic than the prophets of Jeremiah ch6 who were effectively conning God’s people with their ‘Bible’ words, 

“They dress the wound of my people

    as though it were not serious.

‘Peace, peace,’ they say,

    when there is no peace.”

I don’t know what Christmas is but Christmas time is here

/ MurrayCampbell

“I don’t know what Christmas is but Christmas time is here.”

Did you know Guardians of the Galaxy is more than a sci-fi Marvel franchise: they have a Christmas Special!

Peter Quill is missing Christmas on earth. His friends have noticed his despondent face and decide to cheer him up by kidnapping Quill’s hero, Kevin Bacon, and wrapping him up like a slice of prosciutto for Christmas.

And because rock music apparently exists on other planets, an alien band is playing a tribute song to Christmas: ‘Bzermikitokolok and the Knowheremen’. 

The lead singer is chatting to Peter Quill about, “one of your earth traditions…”

This alien rock star (despite an uncanny similarity, not to be confused with your typically aged rock star), explains to Peter Quill that he’s done his homework, 

“Everything I know about Christmas I learned from rocket who learned it from Cosmo who learned it from Kraglin, who learned from you… so I thought I would take it back to the source and make sure I understand this all correctly. This is after all a historical document.”

So far, so good.

The band then starts playing their intergalactic carol, 

Out on the third planet closest to the sun

There’s a special celebration

And it sounds quite fun

A jolly old fellow brings toys to everyone

On a holiday they call Christmas

Now I’m not gonna lie

It makes no sense to me

But here’s what Earthlings told me

About this Christmas mystery

Santa is a furry freak

With epic super powers

He flies to every human home

In under fourteen hours

He’s a master burglar

A pro at picking locks

If you don’t leave milk and cookies out

He will put dung in your socks

Ho, ho, ho, ho, ho

Earthlings are so weird

I don’t know what Christmas is

But Christmastime is here

Or maybe it’s there

Or it’s somewhere

I don’t know, I don’t know






It’s funny. The words are obviously confusing and conflating different ideas surrounding Christmas. It’s as though in outer space, 2 turtle doves and 5 gold rings equals larceny and arson!





Why quote this space Christmas pop song? Because the joke is closer to reality than we might think. Allow me to explain.





With Christmas, we throw all kinds of things into the mix. We have this conception of Christmas that is like a gigantic tinselled blender where we get to toss in a hundred ideas and traditions and somehow together it all tastes amazing.















Let’s leave Turkey and Christmas trees aside, and should we eat Christmas pudding (the answer to that one is obviously, ‘eek’). We can even leave aside December 25 because we don’t know the exact date when Jesus was born and there is no Bible rule about having to celebrate December 25.





Many of our Christmas traditions are like garnishes; nice, but not the essence.





“I don’t know what Christmas is but Christmas time is here.”





I suspect this sentiment is more earthbound than the interplanetary travellers realise.





‘Bzermikitokolok and the Knowheremen’ get one thing right; go back to the source. It makes sense, doesn’t it? Why float around with third-hand notions and rumours when we can open up the original and best source for what Christmas is about? 





The Bible gives us the original and superlative story. It is the one indispensable message. For example, in Luke’s account of the birth of Jesus, we read, 





“The angel said to the Shepherds, “Do not be afraid. I bring you good news that will cause great joy for all the people. Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord. This will be a sign to you: You will find a baby wrapped in cloths and lying in a manger.”





With a few words, the world changed forever:





God isn’t silent: here is a message is from God





God is no grinch-like character: his message is good news that brings great joy.





The message is about a Saviour. The Saviour’s name is Jesus, and he is ascribed the titles ‘Messiah’ and ‘Lord’. Far from vague and ambiguous meanings,  God’s good news message points to a humble birth with huge God given credentials. As we read from other parts of the Bible, these credentials are tied up with ancient God given promises to bring salvation to a world that is broken and filled with wickedness.





As much as I enjoy roast Turkey and the smell of pine trees, these don’t come close to the magnitude of this Divine word for the world.





A new French restaurant opened in Melbourne recently, Maison Bâtard. The menu is mouth-watering. A host of celebrities were invited to a special gala opening event and were the first to taste the menu. If you’re a famous Melbournian, wealthy or have the right connections, you may have made the cut. Perhaps you were invited!





That’s not how God chooses. When we visit the sources and uncover the message that gave birth to Christmas, we discover something wonderfully subversive and counter-cultural. God’s message is of incalculable importance and God chose to announce his good news, not to the famous and important, but to a group of underpaid, uneducated and probably unlikeable Shepherds. This speaks volumes about theGod who exists.





God doesn’t work according to who’s popular, who’s powerful, or who’s likeable. God acts according to his own character. That God announced his good news to the Shepherds signals grace and mercy. That means, God’s message can be for me.





On that holy night, there was no confusion, no myths, or hearsay. This is a clear announcement from God about his Son Jesus who came to save. 





We know from the sources that as Jesus grew and later began his public ministry, a lot of people pushed against on his message. Some people thought he was a joke. Some people thought Jesus was evil. Others again, dismissed Jesus as though he’s not for me.





These are traditions we continue to this very day. 





This raises a pertinent question, if not Jesus, where do we turn for good news? Where are turning for news that brings about forgiveness, hope, and peace? Where will we uncover substantive and reliable good news that will overcome the sorrow, fear and wickedness we see around in society and also see in ourselves?





There is a serious message revealed that night in Bethlehem. Whether we are living in Eastern Europe or in the Middle East or Eastern Australia, we need good news that will overcome the darkest night and deepest fears.





As we explore the original sources, we learn that God doesn’t just make bold promises, he keeps them. This same Jesus born in the manger, lived out the promise of salvation, even though it meant death on a cross, and from the grave to resurrection life.





“I don’t know what Christmas is but Christmas time is here.”





Except we can know. People celebrate Christmas for all kinds of reasons, and that’s ok. It is possible to distinguish between the add-ons and garnishes and uncover the truth and power in the historical document. The Shepherds responded to the good news announcement by visiting Bethlehem and investigating for themselves. Perhaps now is the season for us to do the same. 

			

	


			
				


	

							
Myer’s Perfect Christmas Message
						

			 / MurrayCampbell								

			


		

		






“Gifts for the naughty and the nice. Share the Joy”





Has Myer rediscovered the evangelistic drive of its founder, Sidney Myer? 





Most Australians may be unaware, but 104 years ago, Sidney Myer became a Christian. Myer was an upcoming Melbourne entrepreneur and businessman. Despite growing success, he had made some rather poor choices in life, one of which resulted in his first marriage ending.





One day, another Melbourne businessman named Lee Neil, had his company bought out by Sidney Myer. Neil then went to work for Myer. Neil was a Christian and over time he shared with Myer his most precious possession, God’s good news of Jesus. 





Sidney Myer could not buy or afford this news of Divine forgiveness. As the Apostle Paul once explained, 





‘it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God’





Once Myer realised this message, this gift of God transformed the way he did business. Generosity was part of the parcel of his success. Myer included his employees in the benefits of a growing company and he shared his profits among those who had little. He even celebrated Christmas by organising lunches for 100s of people. Today, Sidney Myer remains one of Australia’s great success stories, but few are aware of the Divine gift that prompted his philanthropy. Indeed, he rarely made mention of it during his lifetime, apart from a few occasions when he was encouraging others to join a charitable cause. 





Has Myer recaptured Sidney Myer’s greatest vision? 





Perhaps? I suspect not.  The furry creature who features on the billboard is named, ‘humbug’, and apparently you can buy your very own soft and cuddly humbug in Myer. From doing a little research today, I’ve learned that humbug represents the annoyance and grrr most of us feel at some point around Christmas (sound familiar?). Whatever the marketing intention, the statement is true: “Gifts for the naughty and the nice. Share the Joy”.





 In fact, I reckon Myer’s marketing department has underestimated how true their slogan is. Consider these amazing words from the Bible, 





“She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.”” (Matt 1:21)





“Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst” (1 Timothy 2:15)





If anything, humbug underestimates the seismic problem of the human condition that Christmas exposes, just as the red-suited man from the North Pole gets it wrong. We are more than a little grumpy, and unlike jolly Mr Claus who keeps his studious eyes on 2 very different lists, the God of Christmas delivers a very different message. It’s not the righteous who find blessing and the sinners get lumps of coal; everyone sits on the same page.





Here lays the cutting edge of Christianity, which makes the Gospel unlike every other story, philosophy and religion. God doesn’t choose between the naughty and nice. He says, ‘Christ died for the ungodly…God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us… the gift is not like the trespass. For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many! (Romans 5)





The message of the Christ is one of overflowing love and mercy toward those who are undeserving and unable. Imagine a God who gives gifts unmerited! Imagine God whose only Son sacrificed himself to deliver us from every iniquity, even death?  Imagine if the real message of Christmas isn’t ‘be nice not naughty’ but, you are forgiven; come home to God. Of course, we don’t have to imagine. Look at that night in Bethlehem. Check out the infant Jesus and his life, words and deeds. Above all, come to terms with why the only good man chose to die on a Roman cross.





Thank you Myer for your Christmas message this year. I for one, will ‘share the joy’. Jesus really is good news, God’s “Gift for the naughty and the nice.” 

			

	


			
				


	

							
Brian Cox is angry at the Bible
						

			 / MurrayCampbell								

			


		

		

“The Future Is Real. The Past Is All Made Up.” (Logan Roy)





“Let God be true, and every human being a liar.” (The Apostle Paul,  Romans 3:4)





Brian Cox is a brilliant actor, but I suspect he needs some direction when it comes to understanding the Bible. He is angry at the Bible. Cox is raging against the Bible. In a recent interview, he let loose his fury as though gathering up Logan Roy, Agamemnon, and Ward Abbott into a single character, and creating a whirlwind of resentment. 





To say Brian Cox is not a fan of the Bible is an understatement. 





“The Bible is one of the worst books ever, for me, from my point of view. Because it starts with the idea that out of Adam’s rib, this woman was created, and [people will] believe it cause they’re stupid enough.”















“They’re not dealing with who we are. We’re dealing with, ‘Oh if God says this and God does that,’ and you go, ‘Well what is God?’ We’ve created that idea of God, and we’ve created it as a control issue, and it’s also a patriarchal issue.”





“We have to honor [women], and we have to give them their place and we’re resistant to that because it’s Adam and Eve. I mean, the propaganda goes right way back.”





It’s hard to argue against this cogent line of thought. Stupid people! Yes. all these Bible-believing people are idiotic, intellectual shrimps. What on earth was Augustine ever thinking? It’s all become clear, Aquinas, Isaac Watts, Medal, Faraday, and Calvin aren’t intellectual giants from the past, but shrivelling stupids whose ideas should be ditched.  Let’s also add C.S Lewis to the rolls of stupids, and J.S Bach, Wilberforce and more. When I think of the Bible, my mind naturally turns to all those dull-witted Christians in my church with a PhD and even who dare lecture students in our universities: science, law, and philosophy. What about those poor sick people in our cities who are attended to by medical doctors, who give the impression of medical expertise but are secretly carrying a Bible app on their phone?! 





Brian Cox, obviously you have a gripe against the Bible, and against God, but calling people stupid on account of their positive view of the Bible is akin to claiming Shakespeare is a third-rate literary hack.





Leaving aside Cox’s erudite assault on Bible-believing men and women, in his performative speech act, the Scottish actor failed to mention several salient points. Or rather, perhaps he is unaware he is plagiarising the words of another. 





Let me explain,.





First up, Brian Cox wants to blame the Bible for certain views about men and women, in particular where women are viewed as lesser than men.   To be sure, there have been some pretty horrific attitudes toward women in history,  including by many of the characters Cox has played over the years. Agamemnon is hardly a model for positive masculinity! While he is letting loose on the Bible, perhaps Cox would like to share what he thinks about how women are treated in Islamic countries or the Hindi practice of Sati? 





No sensible person (Christian or not) denies that women haven’t always been given the respect and dignity deserved, even under the guise of Christianity. It is also undeniable that the very notion of female equality and worth is deeply rooted in the Bible, and yes, from its earliest pages in Genesis chs.1 and 2. The very notion of gender equality comes from the Biblical idea of the image dei. 





The great egalitarian project is a direct product of the Bible’s anthological vision. As the Apostle Paul wrote almost 2000 years ago, 





“There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)





It is this thoroughly Judeo-Christian notion, exemplified in the life of Jesus, that shocked the Roman world and with time, transformed attitudes toward women, the young, the elderly and the most marginalised in society. Historian Tom Holland, explains





‘Christianity gave women a dignity that no previous sexual dispensation had offered’





Instead of men using their ‘power’ to subject women and use them for sexual gratification, Christianity taught that sex should be reserved for marriage and that a husband is to follow Christ’s example and lay down his life for his wife. Christianity drew boundaries which began to dismantle mysogeny, 





“over the course of the first centuries of Christianity, this understanding of sex eats like a kind of acid through the understanding that the Romans previously had of how sex operates. And over the course of Christian history, the church imposes on believing Christians this sense that being a powerful male does not license you to have multiple wives and concubines. You have to focus on one.”





Sexual restraint was an anti-roman view of the world,  and it’s one Tom Holland notes is alive today and whose pushback is anonymously Christian, 





But it turns out, as we see now in America, that this idea that free love is a great thing, have sex any way you want, actually turns out to be better for men than for women, because essentially, it’s licences for men to sexually harass their social inferiors. And that’s what the Harvey Weinstein Me Too thing is all about. And, and, in a way, the perfect illustration of this paradox, a kind of moral Mobius Strip, is that when women go on their marches to protest against sexual harassment, many of them will wear red robes and white bonnets.





This is the uniform that they’ve taken from The Handmaid’s Tale, a novel by Margaret Atwood, which then became a TV series: a dystopian satire set in a future America that’s become basically fundamentalist Christian. And it’s drawing on the model of Puritan New England. But what is it that these women are demanding? They’re demanding that men become Puritan.”





So Brian Cox is irritated by the Bible even though it is the Bible that gave birth to the glory and value of womanhood.





The irony of Cox’s confessions continues. As I listened to Brian Cox’s rage against the Bible, it’s hard not to notice that he is being incredibly biblical. He’s playing a character from inside the pages of the Scriptures. Even his unbelief is a product of the Bible. Whether it’s Pharaoh or Herod, Cox’s words conform to the pattern of Biblical unbelief. As in the case of Pharaoh, Pharaonic hubris and obstinacy against the God who speaks did little except reinforce what God had spoken. 





Cox is also angry about the role religion plays in global violence and unrest. Preach it, Brian! As a Christian, I also find it distressing. Indeed, take a look at the Bible and we’ll find more than a few verses that express God’s anger at human conflict. For a moment, let’s play along Cox’s script and close the Bible for good, as though that were actually possible. Let’s now imagine how peace-loving and egalitarian our world would be…or should tell someone tell him about all those atheistic peace-loving regimes who created utopia for their people: Lenin, Stalin Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot.  And let’s not forget that bastian of Freedom, North Korea.





Brian, you may well believe everything you have said about the Bible, and if you want to be consistent, then you really ought to reject the very ideas and values that originate in the Bible. I suspect you are not keen to return to the days of ancient Rome or the times of the Trojan War and validate the Agamemnon’s, the Paris’, and Andrew Tate’s of the world?





Religion is problematic and so is its removal. And this is where, Brian Cox, you have greatly misunderstood the Bible.





One of the brilliant things about the Bible is how it does not fit neatly inside any single culture or time. The Bible confronts and comforts, the words on the page astonish and shake, they subvert and heal.





Regardless of how we feel about the Bible, this book is the most extraordinary volume ever written and the work that has had greater influence upon our world today than any other. We might respond with anger, but we cannot ignore it.





I guess I could write a version of the Bible that conforms with every idea and attitude I want validated. It might possible to write a story of the world where I get to define righteousness and truth. But then the Bible would lose its independence, authority, and power. It would turn into one of Logan Roy’s lackeys, rather than the words of a loving Father appealing for reconciliation and offering grace.





The God of the Bible couldn’t be further from the vindictive, spiteful, and manipulative Logan Roy and power abusive Agamemnon. To be sure, the God of the Bible believes in big T truth and a big R righteousness. Do we really want to live in a world without ultimate truth and justice? Accompanying these epistemological and moral necessities is the Bible’s central theme: grace. 





I’m preaching this Sunday on a portion of the Bible from the book of Hebrews and there in chapter 9 we come across the idea of inheritance. Receiving the father’s inheritance is not performative or about power, aka Succession, but grace. We might suffer siblings from rivalry, and plot the Father’s downfall as though God’s name is Logan Roy. But the God of grace longs to extend grace and offer as a gift, an inheritance that will never spoil fade or disappoint. 





You see, the Bible is about Jesus. Act 1 of the Bible is preparing for and pointing to the coming of God’s only Son.  Act 2 reveals the Son. The Bible is about Jesus, and he gets to tell us what God is like.





You may not like the Bible, but at least understand the Bible’s message and how many of our greatest needs, hopes and values, depend upon the promise of these very Scriptures. 

			

	


			
				


	

							
GAFCON leading the way
						

			 / MurrayCampbell								

			


		

		

A game of AFL is taking place on a local oval when a small group jump the fence and start kicking a round ball along the ground. The game stops. Players approach the group and ask them to desist. 





They retort, ‘we’re also playing football.





The players answer, ‘no, you’re playing a different game. Different ball, different shaped ground, different goals….if you’re interested, you can join us but first of all, get rid of the soccer ball’.





The group insist, ‘no, we are playing football. We can all play together at the same time.”





In trying to point out the obvious, someone again speaks up, ‘hang on, look…the balls are a different shape. The goals are different. You’re wanting a completely different sport.’





Ignoring the self-evident, the group gaslight the footy plays and again insist, 





“We’re going to use this ground. Let’s talk about it. Let’s arrange a series of meetings to sort it out. After all, what we share in common is far greater than our differences.”





In the meantime, the match has been severely disrupted, the umpires feel bullied, and with each new sentence uttered by the small group of soccer players, they encroach further onto the oval and begin handing out Man U jumpers to everyone.





A significant announcement was made this week, one which may change the Church landscape in Australia. The decision is not so much about changing the game but is confirming that we will not change the game. GAFCON is responding to what is a tireless intrusion onto Christian Churches by certain bishops and leaders who are trying to change the Gospel beyond recognition. They are not playing the same game as Christians Churches, but something quite different. 















Bishop Richard Condie, has explained the situation well, 





“You know as well as I do that there is an emergency…When some of our bishops have failed to affirm basic biblical teachings [on marriage and sexual ethics] at the recent General Synod – when 12 of our bishops failed to uphold what Christians have taught for millennia – you know there is an emergency.”





“The issue for us is the authority of the Bible.”





He’s right. And let’s not fall for the red herring, “GAFCON are obsessed with sex and sexuality”, as one person put it yesterday. Not at all. It is the errant bishops who keep pushing and insisting churches allow and change their doctrines and practices on sex and marriage. GAFCON is rightly observing how these aberrant views impact and are ultimately shaped by a distorted theology of the Bible and the Gospel.





Marriage may be the presenting issue, but it is about so much more. There is an irreconcilable view of the Bible, of the cross, of the nature of sin and salvation, and the list continues. It shouldn’t surprise us to learn that ecclesial leaders who reject the Bible’s teaching on sexuality often don’t believe in other crucial doctrines including the atonement and the resurrection.





As we turn to Jesus, we find the superlative includer. Jesus shows kindness and mercy toward those who for 100 reasons sit outside the Kingdom of God.  The very definition of a Christian is someone who did not belong and now by grace alone is welcomed by God. The same Jesus insisted on the biblical teaching on marriage and human sexuality. Jesus describes any sexual activity outside marriage between a man and a woman as ‘immoral. Today’s faithless bishops are pretty much saying,  Jesus is wrong.





The Bible is clear, our moral practitioning is connected to other essential Christian beliefs about God and about sin and salvation and more.





“Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.” (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)





“ We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.” (1 Timothy 1:9-11)





Churches that adopt the anthropological positions of popular culture are not serving their community well or God. They are giving people a message without hope and without grace. They are like an old English General sipping his brandy from a grand chateau while sending a carrier pigeon to the front line and telling the soldiers in the trenches, ‘there is peace. You are safe. All is well’. 





Even as hundreds of Australian Anglicans meet in Canberra this week, I’ve heard some Anglican voices crying out, ‘peace, peace…what we need to do is keep dialoguing and living together’.





This reminds me of Bishop Curry and his famed sermon of ‘love’ at Meghan and Prince Harry’s wedding in 2018. Behind the scenes, this preacher of love was seizing church properties and dragging leaders before disciplinary hearings. For what crime of the church? These pastors and churches continued to teach the orthodox position on marriage rather than capitulating to the culture. 





Conversations and meetings and forums and synods have met for years, and sadly little progress made. What are Christian Churches meant to do when bishops and coaches insist on changing the very game?





GAFCON is choosing faithfulness to God over allegiance to broken institutions.





The Sydney Morning Herald has published a fair report on the story, although there was this one unfortunate line,





“The Diocese of the Southern Cross was formally launched in Canberra on Sunday. The first service was led by a rebel minister who resigned from the liberal Brisbane Archdiocese because he “cannot go along with same-sex blessings”.





Rebel isn’t the right word to describe Rev Peter Palmer. He has given up a steady stipend and is now driving a bus to put bread on the table. His congregation has lost their church’s property. Far from being a ‘rebel minister’, Palmer is a Christian minister who has chosen to remain faithful to Jesus while his Diocesan bishops have chosen faithlessness to both the Gospel and the churches under their care. 





As news of this week’s GAFCON announcement circulates, I am not hearing cheers and laughter over the decision to introduce a new Anglican Diocese in Australia, but tears and lament at seeing ecclesial leaders persisting with errant teachings and destroying churches under their care. And there is love for God and the deep desire for the Gospel to go out to Australians.





Christ’s Church is holy to God. The Gospel is too vital for Christians to play ball with those who are maligning it.  People (both inside and outside churches) are too important and misleading them with errant teachings doesn’t help anyone.





This issue isn’t limited to the Anglican Communion. There are other Christian denominations in Australia facing similar trouble. Eventually, we must decide, who will we follow. Will we obey the Lord of the Church, Jesus Christ, or will we play the role of the chameleon and keep changing the gospel according to the whims of the culture?

			

	


			
				


	

							
Banning Books in Hong Kong and more
						

			 / MurrayCampbell						 / 1 Comment
								

			


		

		

“As a young person, to already have the courage to face the pitiless glare, to overcome the fear of death, and to regain respect for death – this is the task of this young generation. And thus you do well in this midnight hour to commit to the flames the evil spirit of the past. This is a strong, great and symbolic deed – a deed which should document the following for the world to know”.





The above words formed part of a speech which was aimed at calling people to a return to morality and social decency. This address given to university students was of course delivered by Joseph Goebbels directly before one of the most infamous book burning scenes in history.





During the rise of Nazism in the 1930s, purging the population of dissenting ideas was seen as an essential step. The Säuberung or cleansing included destroying religious and political texts that didn’t conform to the new normal. 





The destruction of books is as old as literature. Hate is a strong motivator, as is fear. To be honest, there are plenty of books that I believe are dangerous, and I’m happy to warn people about their messages. There is a vast difference though between informing people about a book’s content and removing those same volume’s from libraries and blowing their ashes into the wind. 





The Age is tonight reporting, 





“Books by prominent Hong Kong pro-democracy figures have become unavailable in the Chinese-ruled city’s public libraries, days after Beijing introduced sweeping national security legislation, according to online records and one activist.”





A search for books by young activist Joshua Wong or pro-democracy politician Tanya Chan on the public libraries website showed the books, including Unfree Speech, co-authored by Wong, either unavailable or under review.





“The national security law … imposes a mainland-style censorship regime upon this international financial city,” Wong tweeted on Saturday, adding his titles “are now prone to book censorship.”





…It is unclear how many books are under review. Two titles by Chinese Nobel Peace Prize-winning political dissident Liu Xiaobo were still available, according to the online”





This isn’t the first attempt by the Chinese Government to eradicate writings that don’t support the State’s unbending ideologies.










In 2018, the Government began work on a new version of the Bible, to ensure that the Bible affirms ‘socialism’ and doesn’t contain ideas that might subvert the Government. One can imagine how distorted the Holy Scriptures will become once this atheistic, militant, and totalitarian, regime has finished their rewriting project. In many regions of China it is already difficult to own and read a Bible, let alone teach this book in a semi-public setting. Preaching ‘Jesus is Lord’ is likely to end in arrest and possible imprisonment.  





“without the permission of the authorities, you can’t organize a Bible study. And if you do get permission, you’d better hold it in a Party-approved religious venue, at a Party-approved time, with a Party-approved leader and using the new Party-approved Bible, which contains quotations from Confucius and, of course, Xi Jinping.”





Not even Christians are permitted to change the words of Scripture, let alone a Government who wishes to change and control its message.





“For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” (Matthew 5:18)





“All people are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field; the grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of the Lord endures forever.”  (1 Peter 1:24-25)





Let’s shine the camera on ourselves. 2020 is the year of cancelling. We might look at China with disgust and growing wariness of their geo-political agenda, but our own background is a growing mound of buried careers, reputations, and lives. We have long lost the will to disagree with other, even with passion. The mob demands destruction of any idea that is not representative of new morality and decency.





Let’s not forget, even the beautiful State of Victoria has faced the Government’s axe. In 2016, Christian programs were removed from State schools in light of many Christian ideas being deemed inappropriate. The same Government has recently reaffirmed its commitment to ban conversion practices (which under their current definition will probably include Christian teachings on sexuality. This includes normal Christian teaching and prayer that takes place in Churches). It would be silly to equate this situation with China, for the two are not the same. The point is simply, our own societies are not entirely blameless. 





The Chinese Government is afraid of the Bible, and so are we. Perhaps we ought, for it is no small thing to contest the Sovereign God who made the universe and whose word says he will judge all the living and the dead. 





Hong Kong libraries are beginning to experience what is commonplace in China and what religious groups have been forced to do for generations, hide their precious books under the bed because the bookshelf isn’t safe.





No society should take their literature for granted, especially the words that give eternal life.





Put away the matches, because as cancel culture is demonstrating, once it starts, it very easily burns out of control. Perhaps we, who want to preserve the freedom to read and teach our texts, ought to show a little humility toward those who prefer and magnify a different set of books. Let’s argue with words not by deleting them. 






























Correction: I originally said ABC when it should have read The Age