Author: Jimmy Day

I must confess to a certain amount of trepidation in writing this blog as it’s on one of “those” topics – you know, the ones that tend to generate a high level of emotional response no matter what “side” you come down on. I’m referring to abortion. The last time I wrote on this subject was October last year in which I asked the question, “Are Pro-Lifers Really Pro-Life?”. You would have thought I’d committed the unpardonable sin in writing this blog because I asked what I believe to be four very fair questions in making sure that those who say they are pro-life genuinely are:

  1. Are they pro-life or pro-birth?
  2. Are they pro the life of women too?
  3. Are they pro-life in other areas of life?
  4. Are they concerned about the damage they do to the Christian faith?

But in this blog on abortion I want to highlight a piece of legislation that was introduced into the Victorian State Parliament by The Democratic Labour Party’s Dr. Rachel Carling-Jenkins in October 2015.

The Infant Viability Bill is the first formal attempt at pro-life legislation in Victoria in decades, and the first legislative attempt to remedy the abortion law reforms of 2008. Under this Bill:

  • Abortions would no longer be allowed from the 24th week of pregnancy.
  • Infant viability will be promoted and supported (all infants born alive from the 24th week of pregnancy onwards, including as the result of a medical emergency, must be cared for with the intent to save the infant’s life if at all possible)
  • Mothers who are at least 24 weeks pregnant, who present in distress to their doctor must be offered practical support, for example a referral to a pregnancy support service offering holistic care (such as counselling, social and other support as needed)
  • Mothers will not be criminalised or face any penalties.

The Infant Viability Bill 2015 is set for debate and vote in the Victorian Legislative Council today (May 25, 2016) and so by the time you read this you will most likely know the outcome. I believe this is a very fair and measured bill that seeks to find some common ground between pro-life and pro-choice advocates, especially as Victoria has by far the most liberal abortion laws in Australia. At the time of writing numbers appear to be close in the Upper House.

Right now there is a huge disparity in abortion laws in various Australian states. For example, in Queensland and New South Wales abortion is a crime for women and doctors. It’s only legal when a doctor believes a woman’s physical and/or mental health is in serious danger.  In NSW social, economic and medical factors may also be taken into account. In the ACT abortion is legal and must be provided by a medical doctor. The other States fall somewhere between these two extremes. I believe Australia needs to have some consistency in abortion law that protects women and also the unborn child. The safety and accountability of two doctors agreeing that a woman’s physical and/or mental health is endangered by pregnancy, or for serious foetal abnormality, or in the case of an emergency. There should be some special restrictions particularly for under 16 year olds (as is the case in WA) and should be very restricted after 24 weeks.

But with the Infant Viability Bill 2015 in mind it’s vital to get some insight into why a woman would seek a late-term abortion. Doctors Diana Greene Foster and Katrina Kimport of the University of California released the results of some very interesting research on this in 2013.

They found that women aged 20–24 were more likely to have a later abortion than older women. They also found that later abortion recipients experienced logistical delays such as difficulty finding a provider and raising funds for the procedure and travel costs, which compounded other delays in receiving care. Most women seeking later abortion fit at least one of five profiles: They were raising children alone; they were depressed or using illicit substances; they were in conflict with a male partner or experiencing domestic violence; they had trouble deciding and then had access problems; or they were young and had never carried a pregnancy beyond 20 weeks.

It’s important to understand that a total ban on late-term abortions will disproportionately affect young women as well as women who find themselves in extremely difficult circumstances. That’s why point three in the legislation is so important – that doctors must offer practical support such as referral to a pregnancy support service offering holistic care. There are excellent organisations that do wonderful work of supporting women who find themselves, for whatever reason, with an unwanted pregnancy. Pregnancy Counselling Australia is a good place to start as their experienced counsellors connect callers with resources and appropriate services where further assistance is required. Emily’s Voice also offers helpful information and a referral list of organisations in all Australian states. If you live in another country try a Google search to find the help you need.

All this year at Bayside Church we’re reading a Harmony of the Gospels. This method of Bible reading helps to see the chronology of events in the life of Jesus and better understand how the accounts relate to each other. Each week I highlight the relevant readings on my social media pages. When I did that last week I got this response from one of my Facebook friends:

“Thanks Rob, good reading. The title ‘Harmony of the Gospels’ caught my eye. In seminary we’re learning out about theologians who are on the quest for the historical Jesus because they think that there are discrepancies within the gospels and due to the length of time (70 to 80 years) in between when they were written and when the events took place, they feel we don’t have a full picture of who Jesus really was. What are you thoughts on the internal variances between the gospels? I’m not sure what to make of the whole idea. The title ‘Harmony of the Gospels’ caught my eye.”

It’s a good question and here’s my response:

“The reason I’ve used the word “Harmony” is because we’ve attempted to put the Gospels in chronological order of events and then included the various accounts from the four Gospels together. There are certainly discrepancies between the four Gospels and, in my opinion, some people go too far in trying to reconcile them [for example, John has Jesus dying on a completely different day to Matthew, Mark & Luke]. I think it takes a lot of pressure off to read the Gospels for what they are – eyewitness accounts from four different people, written at different times to different audiences. It’s good to study who the authors are, whom they each wrote to and why they wrote. This will help understand the differences between the Gospels.”

I have found the same challenges over the years with various Bible teachers who seem to jump through hoops to try and prove that the Bible has no discrepancies or inconsistencies. It’s as if the very presence of a discrepancy would threaten the inspiration and validity of God’s Word and thus we must ultimately prove the Bible has no flaws. Personally I don’t see any problem with discrepancies in the Bible. I believe the Bible is the Word of God, I believe it’s inspired by the Holy Spirit, and I also believe that God used people to write His Word down and make it available to humanity. It’s at this last point that discrepancies can creep in – God’s method has always been to work through flawed, fallible, inconsistent people (the Bible is full of them) so why would we think the finished result of His revelation would ever be perfect? It’s just like the Church – a group of flawed, fallible, inconsistent people gathering together as a community of believers. It really is a recipe for imperfection.

It’s important that a reader of the Bible understands that its 66 books were written by at least 39 different authors over a period of 1,500 years. They were written in three major languages – Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek – to different audiences in diverse cultures for various reasons. While there is consistency of the major truths of the Bible – particularly concerning God’s plan of salvation for all people – each book or letter should be read as complete in itself with an understanding of the culture, history, language, personality of the author, His reason for writing and so on. We should also consider that the Bible is an Eastern book that can be easily misunderstood by those who read and study it from a modern Western perspective.

It’s also vitally important that we understand the progressive and changing nature of God’s revelation through Scripture. For example, reading through the book of Leviticus from a 2016 western perspective can be quite daunting. There are instructions on how much to pay for slaves and how to treat women as well as various rules on what not to eat. Some of these commands boggle our minds and we can easily wonder at the injustice of what we read. But when you understand that these things were written 3,500 years ago to a Middle Eastern culture, that had very few if any written rules, we get a different perspective. In some instances this was the first time regulations were written down that actually gave slaves and women some sense of fair treatment. Until then they were considered a man’s goods and chattel.

Leviticus, and other Books in the Hebrew Scriptures, was quite revolutionary in its day. It upheld human rights for disabled people (19:14), refugees (19:33-34) and the elderly (19:32). Leviticus defended good morals and behaviour that would cause a community to function well.

Jesus’ teaching continued the revolutionary revelation in His time. The gospels record Jesus’ teaching that abolished the Leviticus food rules so we know that they no longer apply to us today (Mark 7:19) – thank goodness J. He reached out to people that others would have nothing to do with such as lepers, the unclean, the sexually immoral and the mentally ill. The New Testament Scriptures continue to break down walls that divide people and communities – racial, gender and economic barriers are non-existent in Christ says Paul (Galatians 3:28).

People tend to see God through the lens of their own time and culture – this is just as true for us today! For the war-like people of early Bible days God was a warrior who would help His people to destroy their enemies. When God came to earth in human form in the person of Jesus He was able to set the record straight. On one occasion Jesus is

“Sent messengers on ahead, who went into a Samaritan village to get things ready for him; but the people there did not welcome him, because he was heading for Jerusalem. When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, “Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?” James and John were stuck with an old revelation of God and saw themselves like Elijah the prophet. Jesus “turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” Jesus gives us the ultimate insight into the true nature of God, “For He is kind to the unthankful and evil. Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful.”

For more on this topic watch or listen to these two messages:

Through the Looking Glass

Jesus at the Centre

I had an interesting conversation with some friends last week during which one of them shared about a Christian gathering they’d attended. I was aware of the meeting, but was unable to go so I asked how it went. My friends told about the guest speaker, a conservative evangelical American guy, whom I’d heard at a conference the week before. (When I refer to him as a conservative evangelical I’m referring to his faith not his fee. Apparently he speaks for $US23,000); to quote Kylie Minogue, “I should be so lucky.”

My friends mentioned that during his speech the presenter stated he believed “the Church has lost its voice”. I thought it was an interesting statement – as well as a huge judgement call – so I asked what he meant. Apparently it boiled down to two ethical issues on which, in the speaker’s opinion, the Church has not been vocal enough – abortion and same-sex marriage.

It’s important to understand the speaker’s cultural and religious background at this point. To a conservative, evangelical from the United States these are the two most important ethical issues. This guy had made similar comments at the conference I attended the previous week. He called them the biggest “hot button” issues of our time. It struck me how little research he had done into the culture of Australia in general and specifically into the Australian church. He brought his own cultural baggage with him and then proceeded to lecture us on our failings.

Let’s pause a moment and consider what it means to “lose your voice”. We’re coming into the colder months here in Melbourne, a time when people tend to succumb to all sorts of ills and chills that can include laryngitis – inflammation of the larynx, typically resulting in huskiness or loss of the voice. I’ve had it a few times and, for a preacher and a radio announcer, it’s never good! When you lose your voice you can’t speak, or you speak in a whisper that’s hard to hear. That’s the inference in the statement, “the Church has lost its voice”. We’ve either failed to speak or not spoken loudly enough. People haven’t heard the church speak enough on these issues (abortion and same-sex marriage) and we have thus failed in our mission.

The speaker’s premise is flawed for a few reasons. Firstly, I think the church in Australia has, by and large, made its point very clear on these two issues. I’ve read plenty of blogs, heard sermons and watched media reports on the church’s stance on these things. If you were to ask the average Aussie what the church believed on these two ethical issues I don’t doubt that they would have a very clear answer – we’re against both!

Secondly, I call into question the choice of just two ethical issues as the “hot-button” issues of our time. I don’t doubt the relevance and importance of the matters the speaker mentioned. I just question his narrow perspective. Considering the emphasis in the Bible, I believe the most important issue for Christians is addressing the causes and relief of poverty. This is mentioned over 2000 times in Scripture. In Jesus’ teachings he emphasised the “Law of Love” – love of God, love of self, love of neighbour and love of enemies. He particularly applied this to helping the disadvantaged – those in need of the basic necessities of life (food, drink, shelter, clothing and company – especially for those who are sick and in prison). The church has not lost its voice on these issues and neither should it. We need to keep speaking out for (and working towards) justice on behalf of the poor, the widows and orphans, the asylum seekers, the homeless, the abused, as well as those living with disability or mental illness. Let’s not lose our voice on these things.

Thirdly, it’s vital that in speaking out on ethical issues the Church doesn’t lose its voice on its core message. After all, God so loved the world that He didn’t send a committee – or a political lobby group – He sent His Son so that “whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” The core message of the church is a message of grace, forgiveness and reconciliation with a God who loves people.

One of the most impacting books I’ve read this year is Philip Yancey’s Vanishing Grace in which he offers some sage advice for Christians and churches that desire to speak into culture. Yancey warns that the church risks “losing its central message” if it tries to Christianise any nation. He says, “When the church accepts as its main goal the reform of the broader culture, we risk obscuring the gospel of grace and becoming one more power-broker. That is how many in the secular world view us now, as a right-wing conspiracy intent on passing laws against them. In the process, they miss the good news of the gospel, that Christ died to save sinners, to free us from guilt and shame so that we can thrive in the way God intended.”

In his second letter to the Corinthians the apostle Paul made it clear that the church’s core message and ministry has to do with reconciliation: “God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.” The church loses its voice when it spends an inordinate amount of time moralising – literally counting people’s sins against them – when God did not send His Son for such a purpose. Our core message has to be Jesus’ message – the Son of God who had a particularly soft spot for sinners. Remember, “God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” So Church, Christians, let’s not lose our voice!

It’s hard to believe that this time last year Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran had only a few hours left before their execution by firing squad on Nusakambangan Island, Indonesia. Christie was at Chilachap, along with Andrew and Myu’s family and some of their friends, making daily visits to the boys. She was with them to the very end.

Here we are one year later. The busyness of last-minute appeals, media interviews and other efforts to seek clemency for two reformed men has given way to quiet reflection, sadness of friends who are no longer with us and efforts to pick life up and continue with their legacy. Their legacy definitely lives on through the projects they pioneered and developed inside Kerobokan Prison giving help for prisoners to find meaning and purpose in their days behind bars.

Beyond the projects are the people who have been reformed through Andrew and Myuran’s work. Many of these transformed people are now out of prison and leading productive lives that contribute in a positive way to life in Indonesia and other nations. As I wrote at the time, “Indonesia needs help with its drug problem.  What they had in Andrew Chan and Myuran Sukumaran were two men who were helping to reform drug users, traffickers and other prisoners.” But instead of getting alongside these men and resourcing them in helping reduce the drug problem in Indonesia, they took them out onto a lonely island in the middle of the night and shot them.

Because of this, Indonesia is a little poorer today and is still struggling with a massive drug problem – one that the death penalty is not helping them overcome.

Both Andrew and Myuran were fiercely opposed to the death penalty and asked their family and friends to continue to advocate against it. 2015 saw an alarming increase in the number of executions. China is by far the worst violator, followed by Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the United States of America. There is much work to be done.

One of the reasons I’m against capital punishment is because it doesn’t just punish the guilty it punishes the innocent too – their family members and close friends many of whom will live with grief and sadness for the rest of their lives.  In a way Indonesia shot them too. To see the sadness in the eyes of loved ones is devastating. At times you can see their minds still trying to comprehend the horror of what has happened.

I am still angry at the injustice and hypocrisy demonstrated by the Indonesian authorities twelve months ago, but I will continue to channel my anger into energy and continue to advocate against the death penalty; to help those in prison to reform and reform others; to help people out of poverty that often leads them into crime in the first place; and to give pastoral care to those who are affected by drugs.  I will continue to lead our church community at Bayside Church to show justice, mercy and love to a world so desperate for the Good News of Jesus.

If you’d like to read more on this subject, here are some other blogs:

Why the Death Penalty is Wrong

Why Indonesia Just Shot Itself

Why Are You Supporting Drug Traffickers?

Last year I wrote a blog entitled, “What kind of Christian are you?” In this blog, I outlined a number of things that tend to derail or highjack Christian people from our core purpose and focus; things like consumerism, crises and condemnation. These things pop up on a regular basis but one that seems to get the most attention is “conspiracy.”

Over the past twelve months the Christian world has become preoccupied with things like Blood Moons that would signal the end of the world – again! Nothing happened, except the authors of these books made a bucket load of money from gullible church people. Apparently this year REALLY IS going to be the beginning of the end, with a World War starting in June 2016 culminating in Armageddon in 2019. The Antichrist will also be revealed although this particular conspiracy Christian has already named him – Barrack Obama of course! We all knew that right? By the way, the latest right wing conspiracy is that Obama is planning to subvert the Constitution and run for a third term – at least that would spare us from The Donald!

Earlier this year I was inspired by Hilary Clinton’s response to a question regarding her Christian faith. I wrote a blog about it – Inspired by Hilary Clinton – only to be told that I’d got it wrong and that out of all the candidates in the US Primaries, when it came to being a Christian, Hilary Clinton is “not on the list.” Others were quick to inform me that Hilary is part of the illuminati and a whole bunch of other stuff. How naïve could I be? And how old is Mrs. Clinton? The Illuminati hasn’t been in existence for more than two centuries!

Last year a Facebook “friend” tagged me in a post about the US government having a stockpile of Guillotines and recently purchasing more – all authorised by Congress. The article said the Government purchased 30,000 guillotines, 15,000 of which are in Georgia and the other 15,000 in Montana. This claim first originated on a blog that specialises in anti-Muslim articles and familiar conspiracy rumors such as the alleged existence of “FEMA concentration camps“. It’s been in circulation since 2008 and has no proof or back up whatsoever.

These crazy conspiracies came very close to home for me last year when listening to a dear friend of mine speak about these things in public Christian meetings. Gone were the days of focusing on Jesus and the wonderful salvation He brings. In Jesus’ place was endless ranting about American politicians drinking blood, the Mark of the Beast, the revelation of the antichrist – you name it. At the end of the meeting you could feel the fear within the congregation.

In private conversation, my friend chatted for hours (completely oblivious to the fact that I was bored to tears) about the imminent collapse of the U.S. dollar and food supply to be followed by martial law. Apparently the Muslim Brotherhood already controls dozens of American ports and ISIS is infiltrating the U.S. He also told me the U.S. government is building concentration camps and gas chambers throughout the country (even though none show up on Google Earth – I know, they’re in on the conspiracy too). This is as a result of a United Nations Agenda 21 plot to pave the way for a one-world government and the rise of the Antichrist. By the way, Agenda 21 is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development. It was adopted unanimously by 178 countries – including the U.S. represented by George H.W. Bush – at the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. It has nothing to do with Bible prophecy!

In fact, a lot of things that are taught as valid interpretations of Bible prophecy these days show little historical understanding of the Book of Revelation and other prophetic Scriptures. As a result of this, much of the church is watching – and sometimes taking a rather gleeful longing – for an increase in war, natural disasters, Blood Moons and other conspiracies.

This fairly new approach to the interpretation of Bible prophecy is called dispensationalism. It was developed in 1827 by John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren and spread widely with the 1909 publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. Darby went on to be the founder of the Exclusive Brethren cult after George Mueller (and other Brethren) challenged him about some of his unbiblical doctrines. Charles Spurgeon also claimed these teachings were false.

These days much of the church has gained its understanding of Bible prophecy from novels and movies such as the Left Behind series. While these books make their authors a lot of money they do nothing to educate God’s people in a correct understanding of events before Jesus’ return. In the mean time it would be healthier and much more productive for Christians to stop fixating on the Illuminati and start focusing on Jesus and the Kingdom of God. Don’t let your faith be hijacked by conspiracies!

The New Testament tells us a great deal about Jesus’ birth, but little is told of his life from then until he started his ministry about the age of 30. We know from the Gospel record that Joseph and Mary travelled from Nazareth to Bethlehem where Jesus was born. By the time the wise men arrived, Jesus was a toddler and he lived with his parents in a house in Bethlehem.

“Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea, in the days of Herod the king” (Matt 2:1). This means Jesus was born a couple of years before 4BC, as that’s the year Herod died. Due to the threats from King Herod, Joseph was warned to take Mary and Jesus to safety in Egypt. The gift of gold from the Magi would have been especially helpful to fund their journey as asylum seekers.

After 4BC, when Herod had died, Joseph once again received angelic instruction, this time to travel with his young family back to Israel. “But when he heard that Archelaus was reigning in Judea in place of his father Herod, he was afraid to go there. Having been warned in a dream, he withdrew to the district of Galilee, and he went and lived in a town called Nazareth. So was fulfilled what was said through the prophets, that he would be called a Nazarene” (Matt 2:22). Archelaus was as cruel and treacherous as his father, and within a few months after his accession, he sent in his horsemen to disperse a multitude, and slew more than 3,000 men. Archelaus reigned from 4BC to 6AD and so it was during this time that Joseph, Mary and Jesus relocated to Nazareth and this is where Jesus “grew and became strong; he was filled with wisdom, and the grace of God was on him.”

It would have been Joseph’s responsibility to teach the young Jesus in the religion of his people (Deut. 6:4-9), and then he would have learned to know and love God from his mother who would teach him to pray and to know the scriptures. Religious instruction was not confined to the home, however. With annual trips to the temple at Jerusalem and practical worship and teaching by the synagogue (Luke 4:16), week after week the boy Jesus heard the scripture in its original Hebrew form, followed by translation into Aramaic, and received instruction from it for daily conduct. Each synagogue established schools. Jesus would have attended school from about six years of age to be taught the scriptures (Luke 4:16-19) and reading and writing of the Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek languages. And so Jesus grew, like any other child, from boyhood to manhood.

There’s been a lot of conjecture of what Jesus did during these years. Some say he travelled to Britain to further his education while others suggest he went to India. Within a century of the life of the apostles some wrote that, in his youth, Jesus had a fit of bad temper and struck a companion with death. When accused he cursed his opponents with blindness. Others suggested Jesus mocked his teachers and when they told him off for making clay birds in play on the Sabbath, he caused them to fly. These and many other legends clearly contradict the Bible’s statement that Jesus was without sin.

There is no evidence that Jesus travelled further afield than Jerusalem.  Jesus grew up in Nazareth which archaeology shows it to be a small and very poor village.  The world’s Saviour was not reared in the Bible belt. The inhabitants of Nazareth were notorious for their wickedness. This is proved by the proverbial saying, “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” (John 1:46). Jesus is proof that good things can come out of bad places.

It’s likely that Joseph died while Jesus was quite young but even if he were still around, the eldest son of a poor family would have been helping them survive in a subsistence peasant culture.  If Joseph were dead then Jesus would have been working to support his mother and his six younger siblings. Jesus probably worked as a carpenter (Mark 6:3) in Galilee from the age of 12 till 30. Most of the carpentry jobs were in Sepphoris, a village located in the central Galilee region of Israel, six kilometers from Nazareth. Jesus was also a carpenter’s son (Matthew 13:55) or a “tekton”, the Greek word describing a builder, a stoneworker or mason.

Every year Jesus’ parents went to Jerusalem for the Festival of the Passover. Only men were required to go so the fact that Mary went shows us how committed she was to her faith in God. Luke’s gospel records one such trip to the Passover Festival when Jesus was twelve years old, “After the festival was over, while his parents were returning home, the boy Jesus stayed behind in Jerusalem, but they were unaware of it … After three days they found him in the temple courts, sitting among the teachers, listening to them and asking them questions. Everyone who heard him was amazed at his understanding and his answers. When his parents saw him, they were astonished. His mother said to him, “Son, why have you treated us like this? Your father and I have been anxiously searching for you.” “Why were you searching for me?” he asked. “Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father’s house?” But they did not understand what he was saying to them. Then he went down to Nazareth with them and was obedient to them. But his mother treasured all these things in her heart. And Jesus grew in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and man.” This account shows Jesus’ self-awareness and well as mindfulness of his mission. In this regard it’s interesting to note that at least some of Jesus’ younger years would have been filled with feelings of “being different.” Although I don’t doubt that he enjoyed boyish things when he was younger he was also increasingly aware of who he was and why he was on earth from age 12. This no doubt caused conflict with his siblings – something that is reflected in the gospel accounts when Jesus had begun his ministry (John 7:3-5; Mark 3:21).

The following year at age 13 Jesus would reach Bar Mitzvah – the age of maturity. Most of the customs for Bar Mitzvah ceremonies originated only recently and were not around in the days of the Temple. So Jesus probably did not HAVE a Bar Mitzvah ceremony though he did BECOME Bar Mitzvah at 13. The term teenager wasn’t used until the 1920s in America. Before then adulthood – and the responsibilities that go with it – was assumed from age 13 for boys and 12 for girls.

From this age, as well as working in his craft and supporting his family, it’s likely that Jesus studied with the Pharisees. Jesus was very different to John the Baptist who had his spiritual preparation in the desert. Jesus’ days were filled with hard work, home life and social interaction. As a result we constantly read in the gospels about Jesus being welcomed into people’s homes and lives. Children adored him. He certainly wasn’t a soured-faced religious recluse. His teachings show a man who was well acquainted with his world including nature, history, work, finance, faith, and people from all walks of life.

As he got older it’s likely he took on some responsibilities in the local synagogue that may well have included the public reading and teaching of Scripture. So about the age of 30 – the stage of readiness for the priesthood – Jesus began his public ministry which was only a success because of the disciplined years of formation he had undergone as a child and a young man. We can take many lessons from this not least that a good work ethic is an essential quality for success and satisfaction. Another lesson is that we shouldn’t be in a hurry when it comes to the plan of God for our life. There are no shortcuts. Spend as much time as necessary for God to work in you according to His good pleasure.

Over the past week the Safe Schools program (SCAA) has featured in the news with some in the Federal Coalition calling for a review. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull ordered the independent review last Tuesday and it will be completed by mid-March.  Safe Schools is a school education program aimed at promoting acceptance of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender & Intersex (LGBTI) students. The teaching manual was set up by Labor but launched by the Coalition in 2014.

The main concern appears to be the age-appropriateness of what is being taught to 11 year-olds. Other concerns include some of the links from the program to websites that promote concerning material. For example, The Minus 18 website (Australia’s largest youth-led network for gay, bi, lesbian and trans teens) has an article instructing kids on how to “Cover their tracks” on the Internet.

Another link leads to an article on how to make your own sex toys, finding women to teach cross-dressing skills, healthier and safer ways to bind your chest, an online sex shop and so on.

Seeing that $8 million of federal money is being used to support this program the government has every right to call a review – and any tax payer has a right to express their opinion on this. While some are calling for all funding to be withdrawn and the program to be axed, the review could lead to some healthy modifications to SCAA so that it is fairer and more age-appropriate.

In the meantime there seems to be plenty of unhelpful mudslinging from both “sides” of the debate. For example, Katherine Hudson on the New Matilda site writes, “The prejudiced views of Senator Cory Bernardi and his rightist droogs are shared by many dictators, despots and despicable leaders, including Putin, Kim Jong-un, Mugabe, and ISIS terrorists. Those who’ve come out against the Safe Schools Program aren’t reasonable conservatives, they’re homophobic reactionaries, who want a return to ‘the days of the old school yard’ where LGBTIQ students lived in fear and silence.” This sort of rant is singularly unhelpful. Just because someone asks questions doesn’t make them a homophobic reactionary. I’m asking questions but I’m neither reactionary nor homophobic – in fact I’m just the opposite and have received my fair share of criticism over the years for speaking graciously towards LGBTI people and suggesting the Christian Gospel includes ALL people!

The hateful emails that some politicians have received about the Safe Schools program are also unhelpful – even more so when they are sent by people professing the Christian faith. Surely genuine Christian behaviour should include things like love, kindness, gentleness and self-control. It saddens me greatly when Christians fail to present their Christianity Christianly!

So, where to from here? Of course we’ll have to wait for the review. Personally I hope the SCAA program isn’t shut down but I do hope it’s modified. Having a school program that is aimed at increasing our understanding of one another and decreasing bullying is a worthy goal, but I believe the current Safe Schools program is too narrow. While it’s more than appropriate to educate teenagers about the diversity of human sexuality, it’s also vital that we educate them about diversity in other areas too – such as culture, race, and religion. For example, classmates often pick on our youngest daughter because of her Christian faith (and she attends a Christian based school).

Bullying takes place for any number of reasons and it would be helpful for all teenagers to have age-appropriate teaching that seeks to help them deal with it in healthy ways. Over the past few days I’ve had a number of conversations with teenagers and all of them have told me the number one cause of bullying in schools has to do with body image (being too fat, too thin, having red hair etc.). It was the same when I was in high school in the 70s. We had a gay guy in our class and he was really cool. No one ever picked on Graham. But lots of people picked on the overweight Italian guy. In making this statement I do not want to underestimate what LGBTI teens face at school. I’m sure many of them experience bullying and that certainly needs to be addressed through education.

Secondly, on highly personal and potentially divisive topics such as human sexuality it’s vital that parents be involved. With the current model, there’s some material in the Safe Schools program that encourages students to go behind their parents’ backs. It also deals with topics that may go against parents’ beliefs and values. Parents currently have no choice whether their children attend the Safe Schools program if their school is a member school of SSCA. There’s no way to “opt out.” I believe this needs to change as well, much like it has for Christian Religious Instruction.

Thirdly, if you’re a concerned parent then I encourage you to speak to your children’s school and ask good questions. Also speak with your children, ask them what they’re learning at school and allow good discussion to occur. Christie and I have wonderful conversations with our girls on a whole range of subjects. We’ve talked about how important it is to be kind and respectful to all people including LGBTI people. Obviously these discussions are age-appropriate – we speak in much more detail with our 17 year old than we do with our 14 year old. Our seven year old is too young for in-depth discussion on human sexuality. We’re trying to allow her to maintain the innocence that a seven year old should be able to enjoy. Parents should be allowed to choose when, where and how they talk to their children about LGBTI issues.

Teenagers (and all people) need to understand the difference between acceptance and agreement.  Just because we accept someone, and choose to be kind and gracious towards him or her, doesn’t mean we have to agree with everything they do, say or believe.

On the issue of sexuality there are people who, because of religious or cultural reasons or just personal opinion, consider any sexual behaviour other than that between a man and woman in the covenant of marriage to be wrong.  Others disagree.  We all need to learn respect for other people’s opinions even if they are different to our own and, while we’re at it, let’s stop the name calling towards those with which we disagree!

Last September I posted a blog titled “The World is Getting Better.” In this blog, I made the following statement, “In Jesus’ time most people were poor but over the centuries this has changed dramatically.  Since the economic growth of industrialisation the number of people living in poverty has decreased – and has kept on falling ever since.  The number of people living in poverty has decreased massively in the last twenty years.  While there is still much to do we are winning the war on poverty; the world is getting better!”

While we are winning the war on poverty, recent research has indicated that the gap between rich and poor is actually increasing. According to Oxfam, “The richest 1% now has as much wealth as the rest of the world combined.” Oxfam also calculated that the richest 62 people in the world had as much wealth as the poorest half of the global population. That’s 62 people having the same amount as 3.7 billion people!

What it takes to be in the top 1% is fascinating. If you have cash and assets (including your house) worth just over $AUD1 million you’re in the top 1% – the same percentile as Rupert Murdoch, Mark Zuckerberg, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates.

The news is not all bad though. Other research shows that those in the middle and bottom of the world income distribution have all got pay rises of around 40% between 1988-2008. Global inequality of life expectancy and height are narrowing too – showing better nutrition and better healthcare where it matters most.

Oxfam said that the 62 richest people having as much wealth as the poorest 50% of the population is a remarkable concentration of wealth, given that it would have taken 388 individuals to have the same wealth as the bottom 50% in 2010.

This is not to be critical of wealthy people; especially when those who have more than enough spend so much time and money helping others. Bill Gates, for example, says he has no use for money beyond a certain point. And he means it. Gates has already donated $US28 billion since 2007 to eradicate deadly diseases around the world and he hopes to double that investment in renewable technology in the next five years.

In June 2010, Bill Gates and Warren Buffett formally announced the Giving Pledge campaign. The organisation’s goal is to inspire the wealthy people of the world to give the majority of their net worth to philanthropy, either during their lifetime or upon their death. By December last year, 141 individuals and/or couples were listed as pledgers on the official website.

However, bridging the gap between rich and poor is not just the responsibility of the super-rich. Governments around the world need to take action to reverse this trend and make sure workers are paid a living wage, the gender pay gap is ended and equal land and inheritance rights are promoted for women.

This is also the responsibility of all people in the top 1% or even the top 10% – anyone who has more than enough, has a responsibility to help those who don’t have enough. The Bible speaks into this need to bring about equality between the haves and the have-nots, “Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality. At the present time your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. The goal is equality” (2 Corinthians 8:13-14). The apostle Paul wrote this to the believers in the Greek City of Corinth about coming good on their promise to help those affected by the famine in Judea. Many of Corinth’s Christians had more than they needed and Paul is encouraging them to take some of their surplus in order to help those struggling with poverty. The same principle applies today. The purpose of giving and generosity is about bridging the gap between the rich and the poor.

One of the things I’ve done in recent years is to decrease the number of latte’s I buy. I used to buy one on most days until I realised it was costing me just over $1,000 a year. These days, I donate that money to help the 8 boys we look after in our Bayside Church Forever Home in South Africa. I encourage you to look for ways you can do the same. Maybe go without something so others don’t have to go without the things they need for sustaining life. Let’s all do our bit to bridge the gap between the rich and the poor.

If you want to do something practical to help right now, please consider making a donation to Bayside Church’s Home and Away fund.  100% of the money donated goes towards projects aimed at relieving poverty such as Matt’s Place (our twice-weekly lunch program giving a hot meal to the homeless and marginalised people in Bayside Melbourne) and the Forever Home in Johannesburg that I mention in the blog.  You can give on line by clicking on this link.

All donations are Tax deductible if required.

Ash Wednesday, a day of fasting, is the first day of Lent in Western Christianity. It occurs 40 days before Easter (excluding Sundays) and is observed by many Christians.

Lent had its origins in Jesus’ 40 days of fasting in the desert, where he overcame three key areas of temptation (Matthew 4:1-11); denying Himself instant gratification, the approval of people and a shortcut to the plan of God. John the Apostle summarised these temptations as “the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life” (1 John 2:16). Jesus’ fast was in preparation of the ministry He was on earth to complete – the salvation of all. The purpose of Lent is to fast for 40 days as preparation for Easter. Sunday’s are not included because Sunday is seen as a commemoration of the Day of Christ’s resurrection and so it should be a feast day and not a fast day!

Ash Wednesday derives its name from the practice of blessing ashes made from palm branches blessed on the previous year’s Palm Sunday and placing them on the heads of participants to the accompaniment of the words “Repent, and believe in the Gospel” or “Remember that you are dust, and to dust you shall return.” Both of these statements are vital truths in the Christian faith, in which we are reminded of our sinfulness and mortality, and thus our need for a Saviour. The simple good news is that through Jesus’ death and resurrection there is forgiveness for all sins, all guilt and all punishment.

Ash Wednesday was originally called “the day of ashes.” It is first mentioned in the earliest copies of the Gregorian Sacramentary and probably dates back to at least the 8th Century. One of the earliest descriptions of Ash Wednesday is found in the writings of the Anglo-Saxon abbot Aelfric (955-1020). In his “Lives of the Saints” he writes, “We read in the books both in the Old Law and in the New that the men who repented of their sins bestrewed themselves with ashes and clothed their bodies with sackcloth. Now let us do this little at the beginning of our Lent that we strew ashes upon our heads to signify that we ought to repent of our sins during the Lenten fast.”

Sackcloth and ashes (or dirt/dust) are mentioned 23 times in the Hebrew Scriptures and four times in the New Testament. As Aelfric suggests, the pouring of ashes on one’s body (and dressing in sackcloth, a very rough material made from goats’ hair) was an ancient practise as an outer manifestation of inner repentance or mourning. In the New Testament, Jesus mentions the practise in Matthew 11:21: “Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”

The practise of the Ash Wednesday tradition – or the season of Lent – is meaningless, even hypocritical, unless there is a corresponding inner repentance and change of behaviour. This is made clear in Isaiah 58:5-7 when God says,

“Is this the kind of fast I have chosen, only a day for a man to humble himself? Is it only for bowing one’s head like a reed and for lying on sackcloth and ashes? Is that what you call a fast, a day acceptable to the LORD? “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter– when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?”

The true fasting that God requires is that His people would go without something in order to give to others who have little or nothing. Fasting is not just self-denial but rather a way of bringing equality into a world where the gap between the rich and the poor is getting wider.

With that in mind, I encourage you at this time of year to remember what Jesus has done for each one of us. He has paid the death penalty on the cross; He took the punishment for our wrongdoing upon Himself; He rose again – defeating death, giving eternal life and offering a full pardon to all who place their faith in Him. During Lent you can draw close to Jesus and look for ways in which you – by denying yourself – can bring some life and joy into the lives of others and provide for those who are doing it tough. As Jesus said, “when you did it to one of the least of these my brothers and sisters [the hungry, the thirsty, the sick, the prisoner, the foreigner] you were doing it to me!”

I must confess that I find the American political system somewhat confusing and I often wonder at the Australian media’s preoccupation with it. Maybe it’s just entertainment value especially with some of the outrageous statements made by larger-than-life characters such as Donald Trump (a hybrid of Clive Palmer, Pauline Hanson and Jackie Lambie all held together with a hair piece).

But just last week in the midst of all the pizzazz and passion, promises and pontificating of the Presidential Primaries, came a breath of fresh air when Hillary Clinton talked about her Christian faith on the campaign trail.

According to the New York Times, Mrs. Clinton was speaking at a town-hall-style event in a school gymnasium, where she opened up for questions. Jessica Manning, a high school guidance counselor from Pella, Iowa, told Mrs. Clinton that as a Catholic and a Democrat, she felt conflicted: “I would say I am a Democrat because of my Christian values, but many of my friends would say they are Republicans because of their Christian values. So in these next few months as I am supporting you and defending you to my Republican friends, I am just curious, how you would say your beliefs align with the Ten Commandments and is that something that’s important to you?”

The question gave Mrs. Clinton a rare opportunity to speak at length about her views on Christianity and the Bible. Here is part of her response that I found incredibly inspiring:

“Thank you for asking that. I am a person of faith. I am a Christian. My study of the Bible, my many conversations with people of faith, has led me to believe the most important commandment is to love the Lord with all your might and to love your neighbor as yourself, and that is what I think we are commanded by Christ to do, and there is so much more in the Bible about taking care of the poor, visiting the prisoners, taking in the stranger, creating opportunities for others to be lifted up, to find faith themselves that I think there are many different ways of exercising your faith. But I do believe that in many areas judgment should be left to God, that being more open, tolerant and respectful is part of what makes me humble about my faith, and I am in awe of people who truly turn the other cheek all the time, who can go that extra mile that we are called to go, who keep finding ways to forgive and move on. Those are really hard things for human beings to do, and there is a lot, certainly in the New Testament, that calls us to do that.

The famous discussion on the Sermon on the Mount should be something that you really pay attention to. What does the Sermon on the Mount really mean? What is it calling us to do and to understand? Because it sure does seem to favour the poor and the merciful and those who in worldly terms don’t have a lot but who have the spirit that God recognises as being at the core of love and salvation.

So there is much to be learned and I have been very disappointed and sorry that Christianity, which has such great love at its core, is sometimes used to condemn so quickly and judge so harshly. When I think part of the message that I certainly have tried to understand and live with is to look at yourself first, to make sure you are being the kind of person you should be in how you are treating others, and I am by no means a perfect person, I will certainly confess that to one and all, but I feel the continuing urge to try to do better, to try to be kinder, to try to be more loving, even with people who are quite harsh.

So, I think you have to keep asking yourself, if you are a person of faith, what is expected of me and am I actually acting the way that I should? And that starts in small ways and goes out in very large ones, but it’s something that I take very seriously. So thank you for asking.”

What an honest and stirring response from Hillary Clinton. The answer was obviously not prepared beforehand and so it seems she spoke from her heart and, as Jesus said, “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.”

I hate it when people are turned into political footballs, but that’s just what has happened with the massive number of refugees in the world due to conflicts and persecution in various nations.

According to the Salvation Army, there is an estimated 42.5 million people displaced by persecution and conflict in the world. This breaks down to 15.2 million refugees, 26.4 million internally displaced persons and 895,000 asylum seekers.

Australia, like many other western nations, has become polarised over this issue. This polarisation becomes very clear to me anytime I post on this topic on social media. That’s what I did last night. I simply put three quotes on my Facebook page and didn’t make any personal comment at all. The quotes were these:

“No Muslims should be allowed into this country until there’s a process in place to fully vet them. We’ve got to turn away those who could potentially pose a threat until this war with radical Islam is over” ~ Franklin Graham.

“I always thought that if more good people had concealed-carry permits, then we could end those Muslims before they walk in and kill” ~ Jerry Falwell Jr.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbour and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven” ~ Jesus Christ.

And off it went. One of the standouts from the comments was the number of people who agreed with Franklin Graham, but only one person agreed with Jesus. That’s it! And the vast majority of those commenting were Christians. I believe we need to consider two words when considering helping asylum seekers: compassion and caution – and we should always err on the side of compassion because that’s what God has done for everyone through His Son, Jesus – the One we celebrate at Christmas time.

Australia is a signatory to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. This convention defines a refugee as: “Any person who owing to a well founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his/her nationality and is unable, or owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself/herself of the protection of that country.” If a person is found to be a refugee, Australia is obliged under international law to offer protection and support and to ensure that they are not sent back unwillingly to the country of origin.

Unfortunately the politicising of Asylum seekers has led to so many compassionless views, words and actions. We talk about “illegal immigrants” who are “boat people.” Asylum seekers who arrive in Australia by boat are not engaging in any illegal activity – and they are not immigrants. Asylum seekers do not break any Australian laws simply by arriving on boats or without authorisation. Refugees, unlike immigrants, are forced to leave their country and cannot return unless the situation that forced them to leave improves. Personally I’m glad the flow of boat arrivals has been stopped but for no other reason than it has prevented the horrendous number of people being drowned.

In addition to labeling precious people as “illegal immigrants” the compassionless also labeled them as “queue jumpers.” This term shows a total lack of awareness of the awful situations from which refugees flee. If you were fleeing persecution or war where would you go? Which queue would you join? Ponder those questions and allow compassion to put you in the shoes of those who find themselves having to leave homes, jobs and their communities in order to keep themselves and their families safe. Orderly resettlement of refugees is the exception rather than the rule: only a tiny minority (less than one per cent of the world’s refugees) is resettled and there is no orderly resettlement “queue” which refugees can join.

Australia has also lacked compassion in locking asylum seekers up in detention for years. This year we’ve had a number of asylum seekers join Bayside Church. Listening to their stories has been a real eye opener. Some were in detention for years on Christmas Island, others on Nauru, most were moved to several locations. Some have residency now, others are on Temporary Protection Visas. One young man is in risk of being returned to his country of origin in 2016 when his TPV expires. If this happens he will either be imprisoned or killed. We need more compassion!

But with compassion we also need to exercise caution. It is possible that evil organisations such as ISIS will try and infiltrate countries through the flood of refugees. Every country has a duty to also protect its own citizens and so, as we demonstrate compassion let us also exercise caution and have strong processes in place to make sure our country stays as safe as possible.

This Christmas can I encourage you to reach out compassionately to others? That’s what God has done for each person through His Son, Jesus. As we celebrate the birth of the Saviour may our actions and words also bring some peace on earth and goodwill to all people.

Most people I speak to want to make a difference in the world; they want to help – but there’s a niggling question that pops up regularly – “how do I know that the money I give will go to help the people I give it to?”

I’ve had a number of such conversations over the past couple of weeks since the Shane Warne Foundation came under investigation when it was revealed it had donated an average of only 16 cents of every dollar of $1.8 million raised from 2011-2013, to institutions that care for sick and underprivileged children.

And then last week we were stunned by disclosures that only 6 cents of each dollar donated to the EJ Whitten Legends Game has gone to cancer research.

A CHOICE survey found 81% of respondents didn’t know how much of their donation reached a charity’s beneficiaries after fundraising costs and overheads were subtracted. But over 90% of respondents said they wanted to know.

It was timely then that the ACNC (The Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission) last week launched a landmark report which comprehensively analyses the charity sector’s finances for the first time.

The Key report findings were:

  • Charities have a combined total income of over $103 billion (almost $7 billion of this comes from donations and bequests), which makes Australia one of the most generous countries in the world.
  • The largest 5% of charities receive 80% of the sector’s income (this includes World Vision, Compassion, Salvation Army, Cancer Council, Australian Red Cross, National Heart Foundation and St. Vincent de Paul)
  • Last year, Australia’s 54,000 charities spent $95 billion.
  • Charities are financially healthy.
  • Most charities operate a balanced budget. They have a surplus or deficit of no more than 20% of their total income and were more likely to have a surplus.
  • Around 40% of charities have Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR) status.
  • Charities employ over one million staff and engage approximately two million volunteers.

All in all the report shows that Australia’s charities are healthy and make a major contribution to our society as well as helping overseas. But the report falls short in that it doesn’t answer the key question that is on everyone’s mind, “how do I know that the money I give will go to help the people I give it to?”

While some will use this as an excuse not to give at all, those who genuinely want to help will simply do their homework first. May I suggest the following?

  1. Decide what cause or need you have a passion for.
  2. Research the charities that work to meet that need (there’s plenty of information online and the Remember Me website is particularly helpful
  3. Contact the two or three charities you find are doing the best job in that area
  4. Ask the tough questions including the percentage they take out of each dollar for administration and promotion (if it’s more than 20-30% keep looking)
  5. Once you’ve selected your charity of choice commit a regular amount of money to them but keep your eyes open. Charities need to continue to be transparent and accountable.
  6. Consider giving some time as well as money. Most charities are crying out for volunteers.

It’s my personal belief that 54,000 charities are way too many. Multiple charities doing the same type of work means that there are massive double-ups of resources that could be far better used if they amalgamated. While I understand that some celebrities want a Foundation named after them, how good would it be if they adopted an already functioning charity and used their profile to promote it? Chris Judd is a great example of this by getting behind YGAP with Elliot Costello and also the Mirabel Foundation (Mirabel assists children who have been orphaned or abandoned due to parental illicit drug use and are now in the care of extended family).

I also understand that when someone has lost a loved through chronic illness, accident or crime, they desire to establish a foundation in memory of that person. The Daniel Morcombe Foundation is an excellent example. Again, the question needs to be asked, “Is there a functioning charity that is already addressing that issue?” If so, would it be a better use of resources, time, money and energy to get behind something that’s already established and working? I believe it would be extremely helpful over the next few years for existing charities to look at merging in order to make the Australian charity sector more streamline, more effective and less confusing to those who want to help.