Author: Jimmy Day

Someone asked me recently about an apparent contradiction in the Bible. They observed that the Bible instructs us to fear God. And yet later in the New Testament, it states that the one who fears is not made perfect in love. They told me the contradiction had been bothering them for a while. And so, they reached out to me for some answers. Here’s what I told them.

Two verses

The two verses referred to are Proverbs 9:10 and 1 John 4:18:

The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom, and knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.

There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

Original Languages

The Hebrew word for “fear” is used 18 times in the Bible. Seventeen of those refer to the fear of the Lord or fear of God. In each case, it is something good to be desired and pursued.

The only place this word is used in a negative sense is Isaiah 7:25, “As for all the hills once cultivated by the hoe, you will no longer go there for fear of the briers and thorns; they will become places where cattle are turned loose and where sheep run.” The context is God’s judgement of Israel because of their disobedience.

The Hebrew word yir-aw means “a fear.” The context of its use will determine what kind of fear that is. In Isaiah 7:25, the type of fear is an object of terror. In Proverbs 9:10, fear means reverence, respect, worship, and devotion.

Most Bible translations translate this Hebrew word as “fear.” Although this is a correct understanding, it doesn’t do justice to the word in the context in which it is used.

The Best Bible Translation

Bible translations tend to be either word-for-word or thought-for-thought. Word-for-word Bibles (like the NASB and ESV) attempt to find an equivalent English word for each Hebrew or Greek word. They pride themselves on being the most accurate translations, but that is not necessarily the case. The reason is that many times there is no English counterpart.

Thought-for-thought translations (like the Message Bible) seek to express the meaning of each sentence or paragraph from the original language in simple up-to-date English without being tied to translating every word. These versions view conveying sense as more critical than getting each word right. Bibles like the NIV and NLT combine word-for-word and thought-for-thought.

A Great Example

Consider Jeremiah 1:11-12, The word of the Lord came to me: “What do you see, Jeremiah?” “I see the branch of an almond tree,” I replied. The Lord said to me, “You have seen correctly, for I am watching to see that my word is fulfilled.” These verses appear illogical as they don’t convey the author’s original intent.

The Hebrew word for almond tree is shaqed, whereas the word translated as “I am ready” is shaqad. The author uses a play on words that get lost in translation in word-for-word Bibles.

The Message Bible (MSG) that word-for-word proponents invariably criticize conveys the original intention:

God’s Message came to me: “What do you see, Jeremiah?”

I said, “A walking stick—that’s all.”

And God said, “Good eyes! I’m sticking with you.

I’ll make every word I give you come true.”

Back to Fear

Bearing this in mind, let’s apply these thoughts to the fear of the Lord.

The Amplified Bible translates Proverbs 9:10 as follows, “The [reverent] fear of the LORD [that is, worshipping Him and regarding Him as truly awesome] is the beginning and the preeminent part of wisdom.”

The Arabic Bible says, “The beginning of wisdom is the awe of LORD.”

Contemporary English Version, “Respect and obey the LORD! This is the beginning of wisdom.”

The Good News, “To be wise you must first have reverence for the LORD.”

These Bibles translate Hebrew with much more appropriate words than fear.

1 John 4

Fear is mentioned four times in 1 John 4:18; There is no fear [phobos] in love. But perfect love drives out fear, [phobos] because fear [phobos] has to do with punishment. The one who fears [phobeó] is not made perfect in love.

The Greek word Phobos (noun) gives us our English word phobia. It means terror or alarm. Phobeó (Verb) means to be terrified or frightened. Something our loving father never wants us to be of him.

In summary, When the Bible mentions the fear of the Lord as the beginning of wisdom, it means to respect and reverence God and not to be in cringing fear of him. Later on, the New Testament states that the one who fears is not made perfect in love. That kind of fear means to be terrified. God does not want his children to be afraid of him. He loves us, and perfect love casts out all fear.

 

The standard “Christian” way to end prayer is by saying, “in Jesus’ name. Amen.” Have you ever wondered why? If so, I am hoping this blog may help you.

Firstly, we don’t need to verbalise these words as if they are a magic formula. The statement “In Jesus’ Name” is not like saying abracadabra. Instead, it is a recognition of three things:

Authority

The saying, “stop in the name of the law,” came into being in England with the first police force in the early 1800s. “The name of” is a synonym for authority.

The same goes today when emergency services activate their sirens or flashing lights. It is usually against the law to go through a red light, drive on the wrong side of the road, or move faster than the speed limit. But emergency services possess authority in which a higher law cancels out a lower one to protect life or property.

Similarly, praying in the name of Jesus recognises the authority Jesus has invested in his followers: “at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth” (Phil 2:10).

Association

John, the apostle, records these words of Jesus in chapter 14 of his gospel, “And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.”

Jesus then gives context to this by teaching on remaining in the vine, “Remain in me, as I also remain in you. No branch can bear fruit by itself; it must remain in the vine. Neither can you bear fruit unless you remain in me” (John 15:4). The word remain means to be associated, connected, or linked.

Jesus continues, “I am the vine; you are the branches. If you remain in me and I in you, you will bear much fruit; apart from me, you can do nothing…If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you” (John 15:5 & 7).

Praying “in the name of Jesus” recognises our association with Jesus. He has called us “friends”.

Access

My last name is Buckingham, and I was born in London. Next time I visit London, I plan to walk up to the gate of Buckingham Palace, tell them my name, and ask to see the Queen. What do you think of my chances? Buckley’s, I’d say!

But what if I got to know Prince Charles? He and I chat one day at a function, and we become friends. I tell him my wish to see inside the palace that bears my name and meet the Queen. No problem, says Charles, and he makes my wish come true.

I have access because I know the son.

Let that sink in.

The apostle Paul tells us, “In … and through faith in [Christ Jesus our Lord] we may approach God with freedom and confidence” (Eph 3:12).

The writer to the Hebrews says that because of Jesus, we can approach God’s “throne of grace with confidence so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need” (Heb 4:16).

Praying “in the name of Jesus” acknowledges our access to God. We do not come to God in prayer in our name. We come boldly in Jesus’ name!

And so, that’s why we say ‘In Jesus’ name,’ before we say Amen. These words acknowledge our authority, association, and access because of Jesus. More importantly, this must be our heart’s attitude rather than merely mouthing the words.

Any spiritual authority has nothing to do with who we are or what we have done. It is not increased with good works or spiritual brownie points. Our authority rests securely in who Jesus is, what he has done, and what he continues to do in the power of his Spirit.

I recently had a fascinating theological conversation, and the topic of Hell arose. The person I was chatting with suggested that Hell is a place that is absent of the presence of God. In other words, Hell is a place where God is not.

I asked, how can an omnipresent being not be everywhere? How can an all-pervading, ever-present God be removed from any location?

I won’t go into detail here about the nature of Hell, whether it is eternal or temporal or whether the fires are punishing or restorative. I have written about these things here. And discussed them here and here.

What About This Verse?

In his second letter to the Thessalonian church, Paul wrote, “They will be punished with everlasting destruction and shut out from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might.” (emphasis added). Notice that? Hell is a place that is shut out of God’s presence, a place where God is not.

But Revelation 14:10 appears to contradict Paul, “They will be tormented with burning sulphur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb.” The Lamb is a metaphor for Jesus.

Which one is it? Is there a place where God is not, and if so, how? How does an omnipresent being not be, well, everywhere?

“Presence” in 2 Thessalonians refers to a person’s face. The inference is the face is not smiling. Imagine the times you’ve been with someone who was unhappy with you. How did you feel? That’s what Paul is communicating here. He is not suggesting there’s a place where God is not. The picture is of a place that is absent of joy.

But what if the expression on God’s face is like the look of displeasure a parent gives to their disobedient child? The glare lacks joy, but it never lacks love. 

God is Everywhere

In Acts 17, Paul quotes a sixth-century BC philosopher named Epimenides, who wrote, “For in him we live and move and have our being.” Paul then quotes Aratus, a Greek poet from the third century BC. Aratus wrote in his tribute to the god Zeus, ‘We are his offspring.’ Paul applies both of these statements to the people he spoke to in Athens. His message? God is everywhere. All people are his children. There is not one place where God is not.

David the songwriter penned some stunning words about God’s omnipresence:

Where can I go from your Spirit?

Where can I flee from your presence?

If I go up to the heavens, you are there;

if I make my bed in the depths, you are there.

If I rise on the wings of the dawn,

if I settle on the far side of the sea,

even there your hand will guide me,

your right hand will hold me fast.

The depths (Hebrew: Sheol) refer to where people descend at death. It was later named Hades after the Greek god of the underworld. David states that God is there even if he made his bed in Sheol.

Personal Experience

I am so grateful for the overwhelming, never-ending, reckless love of God that has relentlessly chased me down over the years. I am thankful for my first encounter with God’s love when I was a 19-year-old atheist. Even then, I looked back and could see the work of an omnipresent deity in my life. For the next two years, I did everything possible to escape God. But that’s easier said than done. Where can I go from your Spirit?

And so, at 21, I relented and came home to the Father. Since then, I have seen his persistent presence reaching out to people in all sorts of places. A friend of mine, David, came to faith in Jesus when he chatted with a Christian girl in a gay bar. Gede and Phoebe both had encounters with Jesus in a Hindu Temple. Jesus came to Arif in a dream while he was in prison.

Big God

I hope you embrace my intended message of this blog: God is bigger than you ever imagined. You cannot limit, exclude, or restrict an almighty, all-wise, and omnipresent spiritual being. I’ve heard this preached negatively. Maybe you have too. You know, “God is watching so you’d better be extra careful how you behave.” Instead, let’s turn this into a positive. The God who “is love” is with us wherever we are. There is no escaping his grace. Like Paul said, “nothing in all creation will ever be able to separate us from the love of God that is revealed in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Be encouraged!

In referring to conservatism, I am NOT involving politics or personality.

In my role as senior pastor of Bayside Church, I have stated on many occasions that I remain publicly non-partisan regarding Australian politics. I do not want to compromise the gospel by mixing it with political commentary.

Neither am I referring to a person’s personality. Some people are conservative by nature. In some ways, I find myself somewhat conservative. I am not criticising people in this blog who are naturally moderate and careful.

Conservatism is a “commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation.” Conservatism can plague every part of society, is rife in the church, and frequently hinders the gospel. Conservatism, an opposition to change or innovation, is well defined by its synonyms – reaction, dogmatism, traditionalism, and resistance.

Traditionalism

Notice that the word is traditionalism, not tradition. Paul wrote, “Stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught.” Christians should tightly grip the unchangeable aspects of the faith that give us deep roots. On the other hand, traditionalism is “an attitude that resists change, adaptation, or alteration. It is being suspicious of the new, the up-to-date, and the different. It is substituting a legalistic system for the freedom and freshness of the Spirit.”

American scholar Jaroslav Pelikan asserted, “tradition is the living faith of the dead, traditionalism is the dead faith of the living. And, I suppose I should add, it is traditionalism that gives tradition such a bad name.”

According to Jesus, traditionalism (conservatism) is like old garments and wineskins. Old wineskins are brittle and unbending and cannot contain the fermentation process of new wine. They burst, and both the wine and the wineskin are ruined. Have you ever met a brittle, unbending Christian? They are reactionary, resistant, dogmatic, and almost impossible to have a decent conversation with unless you completely agree with them.

Catch-Cry!

The rallying call of conservatism is “but we’ve always done it this way!” Conservatism attempts to conserve the status quo, to resist change even when change is essential. There is a temptation to believe that because this is the way it’s been during our lifetime, then that’s the way it should remain.

Matthew identifies a religious conservative, a scribe, in his gospel. Scribes were religious experts who appealed to precedent – this is how we’ve always done it. The scribes are mentioned frequently in the gospels as opposed to Jesus and His teaching. They are also associated with the chief priests and elders in causing Jesus’ death. Matthew includes the scribes in Jesus’ denunciations of the Jewish leaders’ hypocrisy.

When the scribe told Jesus, “Teacher, I will follow You wherever You go,” Jesus challenged him with a statement, “Foxes have dens and birds have nests, but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head.” Jesus essentially asked this conservative man, “are you ready for an unpredictable life? Are you prepared for change?” We are not told what the Scribe decided. How would you answer those questions?

We’re Against It!

Conservatism is universally defined by that to which it is opposed. If you come across a church or a Christian organisation whose predominant message is what they stand against, run away as fast as possible. Wherever conservatism is present, you will also find legalism, manipulation, bullying, discrimination, abuse, lies, and coverups. Preserve the status quo and protect the organisation at all costs. I know this from firsthand experience in a couple of churches I have been involved with in the past. I observe this sad reality regularly when abuse in churches and Christian organisations is exposed.

Over the centuries, Christian conservatism has rallied against women’s rights, especially their right to vote. It’s been against mixed-race marriage, desegregation of schools, divorce and remarriage, and these days anything to do with LGBTIQ+ people.

The Southern Baptist Convention

Christian conservatism was opposed to abolishing slavery. Consider America’s largest protestant denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC), which began in 1845 because the southerners were anti-abolition. And they used scripture to defend their claims.

The SBC is presently under investigation for the pervasive sexual abuse of children committed by hundreds of SBC leaders and volunteers. The SBC is a patriarchal church that is dominated by white members, who are usually profoundly socially conservative. The report details the decades of coverup of abuse to protect the church. But the lid has been lifted, and hopefully, the victims of this abuse will finally be able to begin the healing journey.

A Major Turn-off

Conservatism was the number one thing that turned me off from Christianity as a young man. What I observed in conservative Christians struck me as dull and irrelevant. What changed my mind was meeting some people in my travels around Australia who exuded genuine spiritual warmth and a vibrant church that was very different to the stuffy, old-fashioned religion I had experienced previously.

How many people in the world today are like I was? Many Aussies look in all the wrong places for spiritual fulfilment because they don’t see Christianity as an option. It is dull, joyless, outdated, powerless, lifeless and irrelevant to them. How totally unChristlike!

Why, Oh Why?

Why has conservatism become the domain of the Christian narrative when our founder, Jesus, was incredibly progressive in his time, associating with people with whom the religious would not mingle? He regularly smashed the status quo and was eventually crucified because of it.

He taught about a “good” Samaritan (shock horror), ate food with tax collectors and sinners, and was accused of being a glutton and a drunkard. Jesus taught with authority and regularly changed and challenged long-held beliefs and practices.

If we are to be like our saviour, maybe we should have the courage to embrace change and create change rather than conserve the status quo because that’s all we’ve known. As Jesus’ followers, let’s do all we can to avoid the Curse of Christian Conservatism.

The end of the world is near. Again!

This time the prediction came from a pastor of a Nigerian church but pastors, church and cult leaders have been forecasting the end, the rapture, the second coming for centuries, sometimes with tragic results.

Dozens of people were recently freed from an abandoned school where they were awaiting the Second Coming. The 77 people, including 26 children and eight teenagers, were rescued by police. The raid came after a mother complained her children were missing and thought they were in the church.

An assistant pastor in the church told the members that the rapture would take place in April but later said it had been changed to September 2022. I wonder if the delay is due to staff shortages in heaven resulting from the pandemic? God simply could not get enough angels to staff the rapture, so it’s been put off until September.

People have been predicting the rapture for decades. They really should give up. There’s just no future in it.

Scaremongering

Claims like these should be rejected as just another scaremongering tactic that some Christians, sadly, are all too good at. In fact, whenever you hear a Christian leader using fear to motivate you (to obey, give money, or whatever), see it for the ruse it is.

Since becoming a Christian in the late 1970’s, I have witnessed frequent predictions of the end. It was going to be 1983 when the planets aligned. No, it’s 1988 when Israel has been a nation for a generation. Wrong again. And on and on it goes.

Untold Harm

The false predictions have caused untold harm to precious people. Individuals had maxed out their credit cards, believing the rapture would come before payment was due. Others sold houses, spent all their money, or resigned from jobs. Some failed to plan for education, convinced the end was near. I didn’t buy a house in my late teens and 20’s (against my dad’s advice) because Jesus was coming back. That is one of my few regrets even to this day.

Wrong predictions cause people to harden their hearts to the truth of God’s Word, just like those who heard the boy cry “Wolf!” I believe that Jesus is coming back but making endless predictions is pointless and counterproductive to the gospel.

So, What is the Rapture?

Paul’s two letters to the Thessalonian church present the most detailed description of what should be called the resurrection. The term “rapture” is not a Bible word.

Paul writes, “For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so, we will be with the Lord forever. Therefore encourage one another with these words” (4:16-18).

Notice the order of events:

  • Jesus comes down from heaven.
  • The departed “in Christ” rise first.
  • The living will rise to meet Jesus.

The word “meet” infers “to escort on a journey.” Followers of Jesus will be gathered from the grave and the four corners of the earth to one point ~ where Jesus is, “And so, we will be with the Lord forever.” Paul tells us to “encourage one another with these words,” not scare the living daylights out of each other.

Until we Meet Again!

Until Christ’s Second Coming, the world will continue as it is. Society will progress as it has for thousands of years. Life will be a mixture of good & bad. As Jesus taught, there’ll be wars and rumours of wars and natural disasters in various places, and the gospel of the kingdom will be preached everywhere.

It’s interesting to note that the vast majority of Bible prophecies concerning the end of the world deal with how we are to live in the here and now. The Bible teaches that the world will end one day, so we must live pure and productive lives in the present.

In the meantime, share the GOOD NEWS about Jesus with people open to hearing it; live authentic and consistent lives that make this world better; love your neighbour and your enemies. Resist getting sucked into these baseless and pointless predictions and look for the actual Christ, not the anti-one!

You may have caught the news that the Senate’s new president, Sue Lines, has said she would like to see the practice of opening the houses of Parliament with Christian prayers ‘gone.’

A Tradition

The custom of saying the Lord’s Prayer to open Parliamentary sessions in the Upper and Lower House of Federal Parliament has been a tradition since 1901. In recent years, an acknowledgement of traditional owners has also been included, the one Senator Hanson walked out of last week.

When the tradition of reciting the Lord’s Prayer began, over 90% of Australians identified as Christian; at the last census, 43.9% acknowledged the Christian faith. And an increasing number of Australians, 38.9%, report having no religion.

Compelled to Pray

Senator Lines told The Australian, “On the one hand we’ve had almost every parliamentary leader applaud the diversity of the Parliament and so if we are genuine about the diversity of the Parliament we cannot continue to say a Christian prayer to open the day.” Some leaders in the Labor Party, such as senators Penny Wong, Don Farrell and Katy Gallagher, have said the recital of Christian prayers should stay.

As Senate President Sue Lines, an atheist, is compelled to recite Christian prayers, I reflected on this from personal experience. As an atheist, which I was until I converted to the Christian faith, how would I have felt about being compelled to pray? The answer was simple. I wouldn’t have appreciated it.

Furthermore, if Christians protested and said that I should pray, it would make me think even less of Christians. I empathise with Senator Lines’ position.

A Solution

I believe an excellent way forward is a statement to be crafted and read that is based on the Golden Rule rather than the Lord’s Prayer:

“In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you.”

The Golden Rule is one of the oldest life truths known to the human race. Jesus taught it, but it predates him by almost two thousand years and is found in all twelve traditional world religions, including Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and Christianity.

The Golden Rule was first found in ancient Egyptian literature and quoted by some of the greatest philosophers, including Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Seneca and Philo. The age-old truth has now also been embraced by psychology. Modern social psychology refers to it as The Law of Reciprocity. When someone does something agreeable for you, you will have a deep-rooted psychological urge to do something nice in return.

Inclusion and Diversity

The principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated is the ultimate key to a fruitful and satisfying life. So why not create a statement encapsulating that truth and read it as an affirmation to open Parliamentary sessions in the Upper and Lower House of Federal Parliament? It would be a thoughtful framework for all decisions, and it makes a powerful statement of inclusion and diversity.

As much as I love The Lord’s Prayer, I wonder if this has become tokenistic or irrelevant to many people. I wonder about the efficacy of a prayer uttered by rote (or reluctance) rather than from the heart.

And Christians, let’s unite in prayer for Australia and our politicians ~ even those you didn’t vote for and don’t like. And more than anything, do to others what you would have them do to you.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics recently released the details of the 2021 census, showing Australia’s population is larger, more diverse and less religious. The proportion of people choosing “No religion” increased to 38.4% in 2021 (up from 29.6% in 2016).

The number of Australians who align with Christianity is below 50 per cent for the first time (43.9%, down from 52% in 2016). I am not surprised by this, and I believe it’s a massive wake-up call for the church (and Christians) to do some solid introspection on how it has behaved and the message it communicates. And so, this blog seeks to explore some things that may have contributed to Christianity’s decline.

Child Abuse

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse investigated abuse against children in schools, sports and community groups, residential and religious institutions, and more. The commission “heard more allegations of child sexual abuse in relation to institutions managed by religious organisations than any other management type.” More than 4,000 survivors told the commission that they were sexually abused as children in religious institutions. The abuse occurred in 1,691 religious’ schools, orphanages and missions, churches, presbyteries and manses, and confessionals.

The sexual abuse took many forms, including rape. It was often accompanied by physical or emotional abuse. Most victims were aged between 10 and 14 years when the abuse began. The perpetrators included priests, religious brothers and sisters, ministers, church elders, teachers in religious schools, workers in residential institutions, youth group leaders and others. And here’s the kicker – many religious leaders knew of allegations of child sexual abuse yet failed to take effective action. We should hang our heads in shame. We would fool ourselves if we thought these revelations had nothing to do with the decline in the number of Australians identifying with the Christian church.

Lobbying Against Marriage Equality

The Royal Commission’s findings would have been an excellent time for the church to spend a season in humble repentance and sincere apology to the people of Australia. But no, the church used its voice to seek to deny a small number of people their wish to marry. When the Australian Government conducted the Australian Marriage Law Postal Survey in 2017, the Sydney Anglican church donated one million dollars to the “No” campaign. Their charity arm, Anglicare, was furious.

Unsurprisingly, the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL) continued to preach its anti-gay message by devoting an unprecedented proportion of its time and resources (maybe $4 million**) to the “NO” campaign. Why this fixation on a minority group, I ask? And how does this reflect Jesus’ interactions with minorities in his society? The lobbying of Christian organisations and churches against the LGBTIQ+ community was viewed as selfish and hypocritical, especially in light of the revelations of sexual abuse. Christians are seen as wanting their way at the expense of the rights of others. This has undoubtedly led to the decline in the number of people identifying with Christianity.

Treatment of Women

Here we are a century since women were granted the right to vote, and yet there are still churches where women aren’t allowed to preach or lead because of two verses wrenched from their Biblical, cultural, and historical context. A friend was invited to one such church last year and told that she could share stories but not teach from the Bible. Go figure.

The schedule for the Catholic church’s recent fifth plenary council was suspended after two motions affirming women’s role in the church failed to pass. The New Testament is jam-packed with examples of women holding all leadership roles, including an apostle, so why is it taking the church so long to change how it treats women? I’m reminded of the words of Meryl Streep’s character in The Devil Wears Prada, “By all means, move at a glacial pace.”

Catholic leaders acknowledged the failure to pass the motions had damaged the church’s reputation, creating the impression its leadership was indifferent to the concerns of female churchgoers. Ya reckon?

Preaching the Wrong Message

I suggest that the church has successfully communicated a moral message to Australians. Most people know the “Christian” stance on same-sex marriage, voluntary assisted dying, or abortion, for example. We’re notorious for what we’re against, how we judge, and who we exclude.

“Live a moral life, be a good person, and go to church” is NOT the gospel of Jesus. If it were, Jesus is irrelevant. People can live good, moral, upright lives without Jesus. The gospel is this: “God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.” That’s it. God loves people and has moved heaven and earth to reunite every person with himself through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus.

The apostle Paul says God “has committed to us the message of reconciliation.” That’s the Christian message, but some sectors of the church have been singing from the wrong songbook for so long that they’ve forgotten the original song.  Instead, they convey “a different gospel which is really no gospel at all.” We Christians are known as sin counters but God is not counting people’s sins against them. Paul asked the Corinthian church, “What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Our unchristian message is turning people away.

But Look at all the Good

We (the church) must not excuse our bad behaviour by pointing to all the good we do, yet that’s the message we invariably hear. Recent scandals in megachurches in Australia and other nations have been minimised by statements like, “look at all the souls being saved.” Or, “see how many poor people we’re feeding.” I don’t deny that Christians and churches do a tremendous amount of good, but none of it is a defence for abuse and damage caused by Christians.

I wrote the following letter to the editor recently that was printed in The Age:

I respectfully disagree with Lorraine Bates (“Weighing pros and cons”, comment, 3/7), who states, “I realise terrible things have been done in the name of religion at times, but the good done should surely outweigh this.” We witness similar statements regularly from Christians and church leaders. “Yeah, sure, we’ve done some bad stuff but look at all the good.” I’m a Christian pastor, and I am horrified by this narrative. On our watch, people have been abused, bullied, and shamed. No amount of good work cancels out the pain inflicted on precious people. We need to own it and not minimise it by a sleight of hand trick suggesting people would be better to “look over there.” In his sermon on the mount, Jesus named a group of people who pointed out all the good they had done. He was unimpressed. We should be too.

The Pandemic

While most churches complied with common-sense health and government advice, there were a few outliers whose voices were amplified louder than necessary. More than one non-Christian has asked my opinion on why some Christians have a propensity to believe in conspiracy theories and anti-vax rhetoric. The selfishness and self-centeredness of some Christians who demanded their freedom at the cost of others’ safety were considered brazenly un-Christlike.

My answer to my non-Christian friends is to give them insight into how some Christians view the world. They live as conspirators, constantly looking for the antichrist and a one-world government. I know because that was me in the 80s and 90s. They read world events with a Bible in one hand and a newspaper in the other. It’s riveting but wrong. The world looks on, rolls its collective eyes, and walks away.

But There’s More!

Time and space don’t permit me to detail other reasons for the church’s decline. I could discuss:

  • The effect of the American religious world in bed with Donald Trump (think QAnon).
  • The departure of some from cultural or family religious affiliation.
  • Ignoring science including denial of climate change (note: The Bible is not a science book).
  • The anti-abortion stance with little or no regard for women who find themselves pregnant.
  • Being against Voluntary Assisted Dying because we’d sooner knock people out with morphine and starve them to death because that’s more, um, Christian! I know. I’ve seen it done, and it’s dreadful.

I have done my best to paint a realistic picture of the reasons I believe have led to a significant decline in the number of people identifying as Christian in Australia. You may think of others, and I invite you to interact in the comments section. Your input is wanted and welcomed.

 

 

** ACL’s revenue for the 2016-17 financial year was $4 million. The following financial year, the year of the Postal Survey, it was $8.9 million. The year after, the revenue was back to $5 million. Their revenue spiked again in 2021 to $8.9 million with the bonus of the $2.1 million raised for the Israel Folau Fund.

In 2015, Christie and I, along with three other couples, spent a week in the outback meeting some of Australia’s indigenous people. We were all senior pastors of large Melbourne churches, and we were allowed this opportunity thanks to a not-for-profit organisation of First Nations and non-Indigenous people. They work together to build a brighter future for this nation. *

We were significantly impacted by the people we met on this trip. We set our minds on learning more about First Nations’ history and the people who inhabited this land long before white settlement. One practical response was the introduction of an acknowledgement of country at the start of every church service and on our email signatures.

Feedback

A lovely indigenous woman who was part of Bayside Church for a few months before relocating back to WA wrote to me: “Your church was the first church that I’ve attended that openly acknowledges the traditional people of that area and other Aboriginal groups, at every service. Thank You, Pastor.”

While the feedback is mainly positive, we have also received criticisms. I understand that some people see this as tokenism, political correctness, or just another example of woke culture. So, why do we do an acknowledgement of country?

Welcome to Country

Australia’s first inhabitants of the Kulin Nation would conduct a “Welcome to Country” as a respectful ceremony where elders from one group would welcome another group onto their country.

They would grant permission and treat the visiting group with all the rights and protections they offer their own. It’s an important cultural activity that shows great respect and honour. But a Welcome to Country can only be conducted by an Indigenous elder.

Acknowledgement of Country

An “Acknowledgement of Country” statement shows awareness of and respect for the Traditional Custodians of the land you are on and their long and continuing relationship with the land. Unlike a Welcome to Country, it can be delivered by anyone – Indigenous or non-Indigenous.

As Christians, we acknowledge the incredible design of our creator God who, in the beginning, decided that it was right and good for the First Australians, Indigenous peoples of this land, to be resident here to care for it and enjoy its fruit.

And so, we continue the deep Indigenous cultural traditions of respect, servanthood and honour by acknowledging that we are meeting (or working) on traditional Indigenous lands. We recognise the peoples’ name (Boon Wurrung in Bayside Church’s case) and the name of the Aboriginal nation (Kulin Nation). We conclude by paying our respect to Elders, both past, present and emerging. In so doing, we join with the restoring, reconciling and healing work of the Holy Spirit amongst all peoples of Australia.

We hope that our acknowledgement of country may encourage others into a journey marked by respect and understanding so that we may together live in peace and harmony.

These practices aren’t new – they’ve been part of Indigenous cultures in Australia for many thousands of years and are of great significance to many Indigenous people.

An Awful Nightmare

During this National Reconciliation Week, I invite you to imagine what it must have been like for the original inhabitants of this land in 1788.

Imagine, if you will, that a family arrived at your house and moved right in because someone told them your house was casa nullius – “nobody’s house.” In any case, they considered themselves better than you. They moved into the best rooms and took the best seats in the lounge and the loveliest spots in the garden. They ate your food, drank your wine, and wore your clothes. You protested, but it was all in vain, and, after some time, you find yourself working for this new family for little or no money. You are, literally, a slave in your own home.

Have you imagined that?

How did it make you feel?

Outraged, I hope!

It’s the sort of stuff of which nightmares are made. You’d wake up from such a dream with your heart thumping and gradually realise this awful scenario was a bad dream ~ except it isn’t.

Nobody’s Land

In 1835, Governor Bourke declared Australia “Terra nullius” – “nobody’s land” (or wasteland). Although many people also recognised that the Aboriginal occupants had rights in the lands, the law followed and almost always applied the principles expressed in Bourke’s proclamation ~ something that didn’t change until the Australian High Court’s decision in the Eddie Mabo Case in 1992.

In 1788 Australia was not “nobody’s land,” it was inhabited by about 700,000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders who were made up of between 500 and 700 tribes. The Aboriginals tried to protest the colonisation, but the Europeans drove them from their lands or killed them. Because of massacres, plus the introduction of disease and alcohol, the Indigenous population decreased by almost 90% by 1900.

Indeed, an acknowledgement of country is the least we should do. We must do a whole lot more.

The Future

In 1835, John Batman made a treaty with the Aboriginal people. There was an exchange of goods and blankets for 250,000 Ha of land. However, this Treaty was never recognised by the authorities, so Australia remains the only Commonwealth national government that has not signed a treaty with its Indigenous people.

Tasmanian Aboriginal writer and activist Michael Mansell said, “A treaty would break the 200-year-old cycle of governments not negotiating with the Aboriginal people…It would say, ‘we’re no longer just going to do things to them, but that they’re included and empowered.”

A Treaty would provide a framework for negotiations on indigenous welfare, employment, education, health and land ownership. I hope that the new Federal Government will take the issue of the Treaty seriously. So far, the signs are promising.

 

 

Australians Together has some excellent resources that can help you understand the importance of a treaty.

 

 

 

 

 

In my younger years as a Christian, I thought that it would be sinful to be angry with God. I viewed it as a sign of disrespect, and God would probably be mad with me for being mad at him, which could lead to all sorts of things because he is, well, bigger!

I don’t know where I got this idea. Maybe it was the teaching I received in my Pentecostal formation. Perhaps my own Bible reading and study sometimes focused on the angry God verses. It appeared it was okay for God to be angry but not us.

Fortunately, I have matured in my faith. These days I read more widely and understand the Arc of Scripture, that the Bible develops and grows as well. The ultimate Bible we should read is the life of Jesus because he was the Word made flesh.

Angry Jesus

I’ve come to understand that anger is not bad in and of itself. That it is possible to “Be angry, and sin not.” Jesus expressed anger on a few occasions. One day he was in the synagogue, and some people were looking for a reason to accuse him of breaking the law. They watched him closely to see if he would heal someone on the Sabbath. Mark tells us that Jesus looked around at them in anger and, deeply distressed at their stubborn hearts.” He then proceeded to heal a man with a shrivelled hand. The “Pharisees went out and began to plot with the Herodians how they might kill Jesus.” And they probably couldn’t spot the hypocrisy in their hearts. No wonder Jesus was angry.

I believe Jesus was angry when he made the whip and drove the salespeople and money changers out of the temple. I can’t imagine Jesus doing this with a smile on his face and asking nicely! He said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn My Father’s house into a marketplace!” He was angry that these people were taking up space in the Temple court, excluding the poor and marginalised that should have been welcomed in God’s house. I believe Jesus is still angry today with churches and ministers who banish certain people.

Southern Baptist Report

Consider the report released yesterday revealing the systemic abuse in the Southern Baptist Convention, America’s largest Protestant denomination. The damning report shows decades of abuse and coverups of child molesters and other abusers who were in the pulpit or employed as church staff. Of senior leaders who refused to act against abusers. Of victims who were disparaged and “turned against.” Of people paid off or bullied to keep silent.

“Page after grim page reveals crushing scandal after crushing scandal.”

All this is from the same denomination that has restricted women in ministry because “the Bible is clear.” It’s the same group that has vilified the LGBTQIA Community. They are pro-life but also pro-gun and pro-death penalty. No hypocrisy to see here. Move on, please!

Sadly, conservative fundamentalists have systematically and deliberately taken over the Southern Baptist Convention. And while they were dictating what women should wear, where they could or could not minister, and who people could marry, they were covering up the worst of abuse. Jesus is angry.

Righteous Anger

I get angry, too, and now I know it’s alright to feel this way. It’s okay to be incensed at injustice and insincerity. It’s acceptable to be angry when people abuse their power to abuse others. Anger is a righteous response, and it’s okay to be angry with God. God has broad shoulders, and my anger does not intimidate him.

My Rabbi friend said this to me recently: “it is important to note that it is not only okay to respond negatively to G-d’s answer to our questions/prayers in the Hebraic tradition. It is indeed encouraged when appropriate. We are taught that we should have a full range of a relationship with G-d, which would include anger and disappointment alongside love and acceptance. All Avraham, Sarah, Moshe have very vocal and public arguments with G-d.” I’d add Job to his list (Job 7:20; 10:1-2).

Author Philip Kosloski put it this way, “So the next time you feel anger towards God because of an unfortunate situation, don’t bottle it up; cry out like Job and question God. Wrestle with God as Jacob did in the desert (see Genesis 32:23-31). After that episode, Jacob was given a new name, Israel, which means, “He who strives with God.” Only after we have wrestled with God can our relationship be repaired and begin the long path of healing.”

Out of Control

Anger is a natural and normal emotion experienced by God and people alike. But like any emotion, it can get out of control. And it is that kind of anger the Bible condemns. In our anger, we must be careful not to sin. Remember, “a hot-tempered person stirs up conflict, but someone slow to anger calms strife.” (Proverbs 15:18).

There’s a fascinating verse smack dab in the middle of Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. For the most part, Jesus taught in koine Greek, the everyday language of his time. But, at the end of this verse, he switched to Aramaic, his native tongue.

How Do You Say … ?

I imagine we’ve all spent time with people for whom English is their second language. They get stuck for an English word at times and revert to their mother tongue. Sometimes there is no English equivalent. That’s what Jesus experiences in Matthew 6. He says, “No one can serve two masters…You cannot serve God and mammon.” The whole verse is Greek until he gets to the last word, for which there was no Greek equivalent. So, he plucks out the Aramaic word, mammon.

Modern translations render mammon as money, riches, wealth, or gold. Some leave the word untranslated, like King James, while one translation gets it right. I’ll tell you which one in a moment.

The problem with translating mammon is that it takes a whole sentence as there is not one equivalent word in English.

Etymology

Initially, the word mammon came from the ancient Chaldeans (The people group from which Abraham came) and has its roots in the terms, ‘confidence’ or ‘trust.’ The Aramaic word, mammōnás, means “to trust in treasure or to have our confidence in material wealth.” It’s the praise of possessions, the worship of stuff! The one Bible translation that gets the full meaning of this word is the Amplified Bible, “You cannot serve God and mammon [money, possessions, fame, status, or whatever is valued more than the Lord].”

A person who serves Master Mammon will live their life to progress in the accumulation of material wealth as more important than living to worship and serve God. Hence Jesus’ statement, “No one can serve two masters!” Jesus is not against us having material things he simply warns us that they should not have us!

Jesus personifies mammon by contrasting it with God. You cannot be devoted to the True God and be devoted to the god of riches. It’s that god who deceived the first humans in Eden. The slippery serpent suggested, “what you have is not enough,” even though they had a perfect relationship with God in paradise. The schemer insinuated God was denying them some gift. The humans were missing out, and God was to blame.

The Snakebite

The first humans believed this and snake bit. The poison has infected and affected people ever since. We witness this seduction even in the youngest children who have to be taught and coaxed to share. It’s challenging work.

We observe the same behaviour in adults. Consider the rise and rise of the self-storage industry. Australia and New Zealand are home to around 2,000 self-storage facilities with up to 52,000 of them in the USA. The self-storage industry is worth well over $1 billion in Australia and growing. What we have is never enough. We’ve suffered the snakebite and desperately need an anti-venom. So, here’s the good news.

The Anti-venom

The antivenom to counteract the poison of Mammon comprises two primary ingredients that are both emphasised by John the Baptiser. Luke tells the story of people flocking to John at the Jordan River to be baptised. John began his sermon with, “You brood of vipers!” Interesting choice of words there, brother! I can honestly say that in almost 40 years of preaching that I have never begun a sermon that way. But John called out the snakebite and was about to reveal its cure.

Three groups of people asked what they should do to be right with God – the crowd, tax collectors, and soldiers. Here’s what John says to each group:

The crowd:                  Share your stuff.

The Tax Collectors:     Don’t collect any more than you must.

The Soldiers:               Don’t extort money; be content with your pay.

John told the snake-bitten people to be content and generous, the two vital ingredients in the anti-venom.

Contentment

Contentment says, “What I have is enough!” Jesus said, “You’re blessed when you’re content with just who you are — no more, no less. That’s the moment you find yourselves proud owners of everything that can’t be bought.”

Remember, you are a spiritual being who has material possessions. We are to love people and use things, not the other way around.

Generosity

The other ingredient in the anti-venom is generosity. Contentment says, what I have is enough while generosity cries, “What I have is more than enough!”

Paul instructed the young pastor Timothy to command the wealthy people in his church “to do good, be rich in good deeds, and be generous and willing to share. In this way, they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.”

Exercising and growing in contentment and generosity breaks our bondage to mammon and frees us from the snakebite. I encourage you to develop contentment and look for opportunities to be generous, declaring that your trust, confidence and devotion are securely in God and NOT in material wealth. When we do this, we break the spirit of mammon that so easily entangles us.

Gender identity is a current and controversial issue. It’s a topic the church needs to discuss in love, understanding, and welcome to those who identify as different to the usual “male or female” distinctions. So, as Julie Andrews sang in the Sound of Music, “let’s start at the very beginning; it’s a very good place to start.”

In the Beginning

The Bible’s first chapter states, “Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have…So, God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them“ (Genesis 1:26-27 NKJV).

Notice the strange language used here. It appears to be a convoluted way of expressing gender creation. Some Jewish scholars explain the unusual language as meaning that God created the first human being as an androgynous (genderless) person in the image of God.

Merisms

The expression “male and female He created them” is called a merism, a figure of speech in which two contrasting parts express a totality. The Bible is replete with examples of merisms. Consider:

Joel 2:28, “your old men will dream dreams, your young men will see visions.” That is to say: old, young, and everyone in between.

Isaiah 57:19, “Peace, peace, to those far and near,” says the LORD. Far and near and everyone in between.

Revelation 13:16, “all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave.” The three merisms in this verse give substance to “all people.” For example, middle-class people are not left out even though they are not mentioned. “Rich and poor” is a merism that includes everyone in between.

So, Genesis 1:27 explains that God created the human being as “male and female.” As a merism, the Bible teaches that humans are male and female and everyone in between. We must understand this about the Bible because these very same Scriptures have been used to ostracise anyone who doesn’t fit into the stereotypical binary of male and female.

Beyond the Binary

Jesus recognised this when he was asked about divorce in Matthew 19. After teaching the people from the words of Genesis, Jesus went on to describe a potential third gender that he called “the Eunuch.” Some Eunuchs, Jesus said, “were born that way.” (12).

Rabbi David Meyer puts it this way: “how tragic it is that anyone would walk into a community which carries God’s name and be made to feel that their humanity, their identity, their inner dignity has to be checked at the door.”

Meyer states that the Jewish legal tradition identifies six distinct “genders,” assuming the male and female as normative but including terms we now refer to as intersex or transgender identities.

Hebrew Terms

Hebrew tradition includes the following genders:

The androgynos person has both male and female characteristics.

The tumtum is one whose biology is unclear. It usually refers to a person whose sex is unknown because their genitalia are covered or “hidden” or otherwise unrecognisable. Today, we refer to this as intersex.

The aylonit is identified as female at birth, but at puberty, develops male characteristics.

The saris appear as male at birth but later take on more typically female characteristics.

Jewish Tradition

Gender differences are taught in the Bible and subsequent Jewish oral tradition (The Mishnah) that was committed to writing in the third century BC.

The Mishnah states, “An androgynous, who presents both male and female physical traits, is in some ways like men and in some ways like women. In some ways, they are like both men and women, and in other ways, like neither men nor women.” (Bikkurim 4:1).

The Mishnah suggests that the Jewish understanding of gender is neither binary nor a framework into which every person must be forced to fit. Instead, we see gender diversity as a spectrum of possibilities for reflecting the image of God.

God’s Gender

We see this diversity reflected in God’s nature. In Scripture, God is represented in human terms to help us grasp the vastness of God. God is pictured in male and female expressions but is ultimately above gender and certainly not limited by it.

Author Aaron Armstrong says, “God is quite comfortable referring to Himself using or inspiring the use of both feminine and masculine characteristics, even if it makes some of us uncomfortable.”

God is indeed presented in the Bible by male pronouns such as he, his, and him, but this does not demand precisely the same thing it does when used of human beings. When considering addressing God with pronouns, the following would be appropriate:

God as Trinity = Pronoun, They, singular and plural.

Jesus = Pronoun, He. Although his glorified humanity no doubt transcends “maleness.”

Holy Spirit = Pronoun, She (Heb. Ruach, a feminine noun).

Ultimately, God is above gender. Gender is only used to help us grasp an eternal, limitless, all-powerful being.

I’ve chatted with some people over the years who find God’s male images to be triggering. If that describes you, I suggest that you focus on God’s feminine metaphors and seek healing from the Holy Spirit because she is gentle and compassionate.

Ultimately in Christ, there is neither male nor female. In other words, the kingdom of God does not discriminate based on gender or anything else. Everyone is welcomed and included by the all-encompassing arms of a loving Saviour. How sad it is then that some quarters of the church still exclude people whose gender identity is other than male or female, and they quote the very Scriptures that are meant to liberate people and encourage us to embrace difference.

Someone recently told me that they felt confused about why God accepted Abel’s offering and not Cain’s. It seemed unfair to them, and I agreed.

We find the story in Genesis 4, and it moves very fast. Adam made love to his wife Eve, and she became pregnant and gave birth to Cain. Later she gave birth to his brother Abel. Abel kept flocks, and Cain worked the soil. Two decades in two verses!

Over time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. And Abel also brought an offering from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favour on Abel and his offering, but he did not look with favour on Cain and his offering. So, Cain was outraged, and his face was downcast. God and Cain had a chat about his attitude, during which God told him, “sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.” That’s a crucial part of this story that I’ll come back to shortly.

So, why did God reject Cain’s offering? Was it because God prefers meat to veggies? Cain was a farmer who tended the ground and grew crops. Abel was a shepherd who kept flocks. It made sense that farmer Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the Lord. It equally made sense that shepherd Abel brought an offering from some of the firstborn of his flock. Both men gave an offering of what they had.

Campfire Stories

There is no mention of teaching on offerings in this story or before. Although God had killed an animal to make clothes for Adam and Eve to cover their nakedness, there is no inference in this story, or before it, that God expected or required an animal offering.

Cain’s gift is the first recorded offering mentioned in the Bible. Should that not tell us something? Remember, this is a campfire story. It’s a metaphor, a parable, as is the case with the first eleven chapters of Genesis. What question around the campfire was asked to prompt this story?

It could have been a child asking a parent why do people kill each other or why is there evil in the world? It’s an ancient dilemma that people still grapple with today: If there’s a loving God, why is there suffering and evil in the world? The ancients would create stories to explore possibilities. The story of Cain and Abel could explore some of the reasons for pain and suffering.

A Question Book

The Bible is a book of questions, not just a book of answers. My Rabbi friend says, “If you read a story that doesn’t raise more questions, you’re not reading the Bible properly.” He says, “The sacred texts are verbs, not endpoints.” Some of the questions we could ask about this story include: How do the principal actors react in the story? What is Cain’s reaction to Abel’s offering being taken above his?

Cain was furious, and his face fell—what an evocative, profound description. You’d have witnessed the fallen face if you’ve ever had to correct a child!

The apparent rejection shatters Cain. God says to Cain (paraphrasing): “how you’re feeling is normal, but if you nurture this resentment and envy, it will be like a tiger crouching at the entrance to your cave.”

God hadn’t turned his back on Cain. God was allowing Cain to learn from disappointment and rejection, something he would repeatedly experience, as we all do.

But instead of learning from the moment, Cain’s ego was bruised. God didn’t invalidate Cain’s feelings. But Cain doesn’t heed God’s advice and has a confrontation with Abel instead. The crouching tiger had not been tamed.

Another Conversation

God: “Where is your brother Abel?”

Cain: “I don’t know. Am I my brother’s keeper?”

The Hebrew here suggests a question like, “Do I stay awake all night keeping an eye on him?”

Cain asks, am I responsible for him? And, if so, where does that responsibility begin and end? It’s an excellent question. Everyone is responsible for others to a point unless it becomes detrimental to you.

God: “What have you done? Listen! Your brother’s blood cries out to me from the ground.”

Remember, this is an allegorical story. Blood doesn’t speak, but that doesn’t detract from the truth here. The New Testament picks up the same metaphor: “Jesus the mediator of a new covenant [whose shed blood on the cross] speaks a better word than the blood of Abel.” (Heb. 12:24).

Abel’s blood spoke of retribution, anger, unrighteousness, and death, whereas Jesus’ blood communicates forgiveness, justice, and life.

The story ends with Cain being disciplined by God and then settling in the land of Nod, [wandering] east of Eden. He gets married and starts a family.

Central Truth

For me, one of the key takeaways from this story is this:

If we lose perspective, something that is temporary can become permanent.

We all have had, or will have, defining moments in our lives.

Cain’s defining moment transpired when God did not look with favour on his offering. Cain became downcast, envious, and angry and then acted out on his emotions.

What if Cain had permitted himself to reflect on his feelings for a few hours? Something unjust had happened to him. He needed to acknowledge his emotions and feelings. We have all been on the receiving end of injustice and experienced emotions that made us feel like lashing out. So, we wait. Meltdowns are inevitable, so be good at them!

An Example

Imagine you didn’t get a promotion at work. You process this:

I deserved that promotion.

I feel angry. Envious. Cheated.

There’s no justice in the world.

These are not evil thoughts. They are valid.

These moments are going to happen.

I won’t deny them; I acknowledge them.

I will chat it through with a friend.

I will bring it to God in prayer.

There are no taboo reflections.

But I won’t let them fester inside me.

They don’t define me.

I don’t have to act on them.

The Heart of the Story

The core of this story is God’s questions and statements to Cain: “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.” It will become a crouching tiger.

Eventually, the feelings will dissipate. But If you don’t healthily process them, the tiger will pounce. If you handle your disappointments correctly, you will have greater strength to overcome those same temptations in the future. It’s a wonderful ancient story with a practical modern-day message.