I enjoy writing a weekly blog; I love tackling the tough topics and looking for ways to express my Christian faith by engaging with the issues of the day.  I also appreciate the interaction that we make available on the Bayside Church website as well as social media – at least some of the interaction.

Last week I wrote a blog asking the question, “Is Hell Eternal Torture?”

In the blog I affirm the traditional view as the one I have always believed and taught, but also presented two other views that are held by Christian people.  I gave a reading list that contains books that present teaching on hell from various perspectives for those who would like to study further.  Some of the comments were constructive while others were critical.  How dare I suggest there are different views on hell?  Hell is eternal, conscious suffering and one day I’ll find out the truth of that – ouch!  “It’s a pretty pissy article, one that I’d expect to hear more of as time goes by. I have read the Bible, do read the Bible, done my post-graduate Theological and Biblical studies. It’s nice to present the various ‘views’ but one thing’s for sure – the contemporary church is getting more piss-weak as time goes by. Sure, they do a few nice things and dress a little more hip, but overall, pretty shallow and out of touch. The real legends of Biblical exposition are dying off and new generations of neo-Pagan, post-Christian era heretics are on the increase.”

One person commented, “I would have lived a wild life if I didn’t believe in hell – fear is a great motivator and anything less than hell being hell dilutes grace I would have thought?”  My reply, “But perfect love casts out fear. What a shame that people follow Jesus as a “get out of hell free” card. I’d hate to think my kids stayed in relationship with me because they feared the consequences if they didn’t.”

What strikes me the most from some interaction to my blogs, is the lack of ability in some Christians to have a mature, respectful discussion on Bible topics where different views are held.

Now I’m not referring to the key truths of the Bible – the things that affect a person’s salvation.  If I start writing blogs denying the deity and humanity of Jesus, or salvation through Christ alone, or forgiveness and pardon through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, then please stop reading what I write.  When I speak about holding differing views I’m referring to the negotiable truths of the Bible.  I would put my blog on the three views of hell in this category.  Other negotiable beliefs include:

  • Varying opinions on the timing of Jesus’ Second Coming
  • Did creation take six literal days or is Genesis 1-2 is a poetic allegory?
  • Should women be allowed to teach in church?
  • Can a Christian lose their salvation or are we eternally secure?
  • What is the correct way to interpret the book of Revelation?
  • Is a divorced Christian allowed to remarry?

The church has wrestled with these and other matters for centuries.  Are you aware that there are four views on Christian baptism; four views on church government; four views on The Lord’s Supper; five views on how the Law interacts with the gospel; three views on creation and evolution; three views of the Millennium and six views on worship?  And this is just a small sample of the negotiable subjects on which Christians differ in belief and practise.

The problem is that most Christians never get exposed to various views.  Their church teaches ONE view – the RIGHT ONE of course – and when they hear something that differs from what they’ve always believed, they hurl insults and cry “heresy.”

I love it when mature Christians can have a respectful discussion on a variety of topics.  What a shame though, when people feel that “their” viewpoint is being threatened or questioned and they retaliate by making statements like “well I just believe what the Bible says” – like I don’t? Or, “I don’t like the Bible to be watered down to make people feel comfortable, warm and fuzzy.” Or, “if you studied the Bible you’d see the truth” – like I haven’t spent almost four decades diligently studying that amazing book! The all-time smack down though is, “when you meet Jesus face-to-face He’ll sort you out.” Yeah, you’re probably right. I’m sure He’ll have a few pluses and minuses for each of us like He did for the 7 churches in Revelation. I’m so glad I can rest in His ultimate grace and love though.

Having mature discussions on negotiable truths means that I will ask questions and listen more than speak.  It means I won’t spend the whole conversation trying to convince another person that they’re wrong and that they should convert to my way of thinking.  It means that we may respectfully agree to disagree, but we won’t break Christian fellowship and unity over something that doesn’t affect our salvation.  It means that I wont feel threatened because someone believes differently to me.

For those of you who are mature believers in Jesus and enjoy learning different points of view on various Biblical subjects, I recommend the Counterpoints Collection. It’s published by Zondervan and available online. I’ve downloaded and read a number of these books on my Kindle and found them interesting and very helpful in broadening my understanding of Scripture. With volumes featuring contributions from some of today’s most respected scholars, these books represent the very best in Christian scholarship.  Happy reading!

I was talking to a couple from Bayside Church recently and they were telling me about a conversation they’d had with another Christian.  I guess they were just checking with me if what they were being told – on a number of subjects – was accurate or not.  One of the topics that came up was hell.  This couple had never heard that there are differing views amongst Christians about hell, its existence and its duration.  They’d always thought that every Christian believes in hell as separation from God that leads to unending, conscious torment.  I explained to them that there are three main views on hell.  It’s these views that I will briefly explain in this blog.  Each view is distinct because of the way they view the purpose of the fire of hell: whether the fire is torturing (traditionalist), purifying (restorationist), or consuming (conditionalist).

The Traditionalist View is the only one most Christians today have been taught.  It was what I heard when I converted to Christianity in my late teens and early 20s and I didn’t question it.  It’s what I was taught in Bible College and it was the one I’ve held to and taught over my 30 years as a pastor – but with increasing difficulty.  You see the traditional view teaches that hell is unending, conscious, agonising punishment for those who reject God’s salvation through Jesus – or for those who never accept Him even if they’ve never heard of Him.  Some Christian teachers and pastors have used the doctrine of hell to motivate believers to spread the Gospel:  “If people die without Jesus they go to a lost eternity.”  “If you were to die tonight do you know if you would go to heaven or would you be lost in hell?”  With the traditional view, hell is punitive and there’s no possibility of redemption, ever (Matthew 25:31-46; Revelation 20:10, 14-15).

The Restorationist View also called Universalism (and includes the Roman Catholic doctrine of purgatory) sees hell as a place of divine cleansing and ultimate redemption.  Like a father disciplining his child, hell is seen as a place where God corrects the wayward sinner until they see the error of their ways, repents and asks for forgiveness.  At that time the person’s punishment ends and they are allowed into the eternal kingdom of God because of the salvation Jesus has achieved for all people (Titus 2:11; Romans 1:16).  In the end, “every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father” (Philippians 2:10).

The Roman Catholic teaching on purgatory states, “As for certain lesser faults, we must believe that, before the Final Judgment, there is a purifying fire. He who is truth says that whoever utters blasphemy against the Holy Spirit will be pardoned neither in this age nor in the age to come. From this sentence we understand that certain offences can be forgiven in this age, but certain others in the age to come.”  Contemporary theology around purgatory talks about it being a personal encounter with God in order to ready God’s people for full union with him because of the effects of any unresolved sin that they may carry.  Thus purgatory is an experience of “cleansing” through Christ. Modern theology dispels ideas of painful fire, but rather speaks of purgatory at a moment when we are brought before the intense light of God, which “burns” away our blockages to him.  Any “pain” would only be the pain of seeing our sin before the absolute goodness of God, which is now revealed to us in full light.

The Conditionalist View (also called annihilationism) is the view of hell as a conditional or temporary situation for those who die without accepting Jesus’ salvation.  This view is once again finding increasing support amongst those who find an inconsistency between the doctrines of everlasting punishment and of a God of love, grace and forgiveness.  John Stott, one of the Evangelical church’s most influential leaders of last century, leaned towards the conditionalist view towards the end of his life.  He wrote these words concerning eternal hell, “I find the concept intolerable and do not understand how people can live with it without either cauterising their feelings or cracking under the strain.”  To many people the traditional view of hell appears to be totally inconsistent with the character of God who asks us to forgive our enemies, be merciful and turn the other check – does God not practice what He preaches?

When speaking of the fate of unrepentant people, the Bible uses words such as death, ruin, perishing and destruction.  The symbolism of fire suggests being consumed rather than being endlessly tortured.  In this view, “eternal punishment” refers to the results of the judgment being everlasting rather than the person being endlessly punished.  The judgment on the twin cities of Sodom and Gomorrah is used as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire (see Jude 7).  The cities were annihilated and the result of their punishment was eternal.

The traditional view can be traced back to the philosopher Plato who viewed the human soul as indestructible.  But the Bible does not teach the immortality of the human soul.  In fact, the Scriptures say, “God alone has immortality” (1 Timothy 6:16) that’s why eternal life is a gift granted because of Jesus’ death and resurrection (Romans 6:23) in which He “tasted death for everyone” (Hebrews 2:9).

I have written this blog to educate people to the fact that there is more than one view on the subject of hell.  I encourage you to study the Scriptures and, if you’re interested in knowing more, read widely on the various views before making your own mind up.  Whatever you believe never use it to generate fear in others, or as an excuse to live a sloppy life.  We don’t love God because we want to escape hell.  We love Him because He first loved us.

Suggested Reading

Four Views on Hell (Counterpoints: Bible and Theology) (Zondervan)

The Fire That Consumes: A Biblical and Historical Study of the Doctrine of Final Punishment (Edward William Fudge)

The Great Divorce (C.S. Lewis)

 

In last week’s blog I mentioned a book I read while on holiday recently: One of Us by journalist Asne Seierstad. In it the author brilliantly presents the story of Anders Behring Breivik, the man who killed 77 people (and wounded many more) in the bomb attack and mass shooting in Norway on 22 July 2011. Breivik was a far-right “Christian” who committed these atrocities because he was concerned that Norway was losing its Christian values due to the policies of the left. That’s why he targeted the seat of Norway’s Government as well as a camp for up and coming leftist leaders.

When I mentioned this last week someone very quickly corrected me by telling me that Breivik is not a Christian, but he called himself one and acted out of his view of Christian values. Consider some of his beliefs …

• He advocated for the deportation of all Muslims unless they converted to Christianity, were baptised and given new Christian names.

• He prayed to God. On one occasion he wrote in his diary, “I explained to God that unless he wanted the Marxist-Islamic alliance and the certain Islamic takeover of Europe to completely annihilate European Christendom within the next hundred years he must ensure that the warriors fighting for the preservation of European Christendom prevail. He must ensure that I succeed in my mission and as such; contribute to inspire thousands of other revolutionary conservative nationalist, anti-Communists and anti-Islamists throughout the European world.”

• He encouraged the Church to be more forthright, priests to be more like in the old days and the reintroduction of teaching Christianity in schools.

• He viewed the execution of 77 people as a way of preventing the loss of “our ethnic group, our Christianity, our culture.”

• He described himself as “a militant Christian and not particularly religious.” He said, “We want a Christian cultural heritage, Christian religious instruction in schools and a Christian framework for Europe.” He claimed, “I’m a Christian, I believe in God.”

Breivik called himself a Christian, and yet any reasonable person would realise that just because someone calls himself a Christian doesn’t mean he is one. We expect a person’s Christian faith to reflect in a certain way in their life and that certainly doesn’t include the murder of 77 people.

Consider the following words, “In this hour I would ask of the Lord God only this: that He would give His blessing to our work, and that He may ever give us the courage to do the right. I am convinced that men who are created by God should live in accordance with the will of the Almighty. No man can fashion world history unless upon his purpose and his powers there rests the blessings of this Providence.” It’s an excellent proclamation that no Christian would disagree with. But these words were part of a speech given by Adolf Hitler in 1937. History is littered with examples like this. Consider the Catholics and Protestants who were blowing each other up in the Northern Irish Troubles or Joseph Kony (a radical Christianist and leader of The Lord’s Resistance Army) who called for the establishment of a severe Christian fundamentalist government in Uganda and other parts of Africa.

Just because someone carries the title “Christian” doesn’t mean they are one – anymore than someone who calls himself or herself a Muslim or Buddhist or Hindu but don’t live according to the tenets of their faith especially the Golden Rule.

I have a number of Muslim friends and they often tell me how embarrassed they are over the actions of Islamist terrorists. “Please don’t think we’re all like that,” they say to me. “They are not real Muslims and they don’t represent our faith.” My friends are peace-loving people who reflect many of the values of my own faith – they love their family and friends, they help those in need and they love their God.

Being a Christian is not just about wearing a badge or bearing a title. Jesus said, “If you love me, keep my commands” and He’d already taught His followers what those commands were – the love commandments: love the Lord your God, love one another, love your neighbour and love your enemy. The apostle Paul summarised it this way: “Love does no harm to a neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” A true Christian will live a life that does “no harm to a neighbor.” Anders Breivik did not live that way!

Extremism is at the heart of pretty much every distasteful and unpleasant thing that happens on this planet and every day we see glaring examples.

The fascinating thing is that those on the right think they’re always right, while those of the Left believe the right is always wrong!  Author Jim Wallis, in his brilliant book God’s Politics, summed it up this way, “The right gets it wrong and the left doesn’t get it.”  And those on the far-right are always criticising those on the extreme-left.  They refer to them as the PC Brigade, trolls, morons and idiots; they talk about the “lamestream media” while those on the left are no better.  They join in the unhelpful name calling with accusations of homophobia, Islamophobia (pretty well every kind of phobia you can imagine in order to shut down decent discussion).  They talk about right-wing nutbags, loons, hacks and thugs.

Extremism at whatever end of the political, religious or ideological scale almost always leads to disaster, pain, hurt or death. Consider the recent Dallas sniper, Micah Johnson, who killed five police officers, as well as the one carried out last year by Dylann Roof on a black church in Charleston, South Carolina, that left nine people dead.  Both of these acts of deadly terrorism were motivated by extreme left-wing ideology.

Those on the far-right are just as dangerous.  Of course we’re constantly confronted with the atrocities of Islamic terrorist groups such as Daesh, al Qaeda, Boko Haram, the Taliban and numerous smaller groups.  German police have recently carried out a series of raids, targeting people suspected of posting hate content on social media in order to tackle what police called “a substantial rise in verbal radicalism.”  Typical crimes included “glorification of Nazism and xenophobic, anti-Semitic and other right-wing extremism.”

Politically motivated hate crimes on the internet have increased significantly in the wake of the European refugee crisis, as well as attacks on refugee shelters that are often the result of radicalisation which begins in social networks.

But the extremes of the left and the right are not confined to violence and verbal attacks.  Consider Britain’s largest union, the extreme Leftwing Unite, that has adopted the policy of a universal basic income: a flat payment to all adults regardless of circumstances.  It’s basically the right to be lazy.

While I was on holiday recently, one of the many books I read was One of Us by journalist Asne Seierstad in which she brilliantly presents the story of Anders Behring Breivik, the man who killed 77 people (and wounded many more) in the bomb attack and mass shooting in Norway on 22 July 2011.  Breivik was a far-right “Christian” who committed these atrocities because he was concerned that Norway was losing its Christian values because of the policies of the left (more on this in next week’s blog).

I could go on but I’m sure you get the picture.  Extremes are dangerous and the sad evidence is that those who hold to extremes will only be entrenched further in them when confronted by facts that contradict their beliefs (this is called cognitive dissonance).

I believe Jesus calls us to extremes but not the kind that bring hurt and destruction.  Jesus calls us to extreme love, extreme forgiveness, extreme grace and extreme kindness.  It saddens me when Christian people cling to ideologies of the far-right or extreme-left because when they do, they rarely reflect the nature of God.  They cherry-pick from the Scriptures to back up their beliefs but their views are not endorsed by the main themes of the Bible (or the Qu’ran or any other Holy Book), which are summarised by the Golden Rule; the principle of treating others as one would wish to be treated oneself.

If you find yourself at one of the extremes – whether you’re a Christian, Muslim, a member of another faith or no faith at all – can I encourage you to meditate on the Golden Rule found in every major religion and human culture.  Live your life treating others the way you’d like to be treated.  It starts with you and me and the world will be a much better place as a result.

 

Last week, I listened to an interesting discussion on euthanasia on a Melbourne radio station. The host interviewed a Christian minister who, of course, was anti-euthanasia. And so I decided to make this subject a discussion point on social media. Here’s what I wrote:

“Once again the Church speaks out against. While I acknowledge that this is a complex and emotive issue, I’m wondering when the church will learn to engage on ethical issues in a way that expresses God’s love and care for people. Right now in Victoria one person a week, on average, takes their life rather than face an agonising death. The Church’s “against” stand on this and other ethical issues does not engage people with where they find themselves and what they face. Christians need to express God’s compassion for people rather than make black and white statements from a distance. Have you sat with someone as they’ve died in agony? Have you walked with a person with a terminal illness? Have you comforted family and friends who are devastated from helplessly watching their loved one suffer? We need to leave our ivory towers and do life with people who God loves and for whom Jesus gave His life. That sort of Christianity attracts people. The other sort repels.”

As always I invited discussion and what followed was a generally respectful dialogue. But one person wrote, “I am suprised [sic] to hear this from u Rob, I have had many of my family and friends that I had to sit by and watch [sic] them suffer, and thankful for any comfort they could get, but i also know the God numbered our days and its not up to us to end them when we feel like it!” I responded, “It’s a discussion. Nothing to be surprised about. These things need to be talked about in a respectful and compassionate way.”

Christian people should not shy away from the tough debates and neither should we automatically be “against” everything – although that sadly seems to be the expectation from many in the church these days. I’m not suggesting that we shouldn’t hold strong views but we need to learn to engage with others and listen to why their opinion differs from ours. Along the way maybe we’ll learn something rather than being self-righteously opinionated.

The euthanasia debate has surfaced again recently because of a 350 page report handed down to the Victorian State Parliament. The report recommends that euthanasia only be made legal for terminally ill patients over the age of 18, enduring pain and suffering in the last weeks or months of their natural life.  A number of other safeguards would also be put in place if legislation were eventually passed. This process is likely to take about two years and there’s no guarantee that current laws will be changed.

Last year Christie and I filmed an episode of our TV program The Exchange on the euthanasia debate called The Right to Die.  Originally we were to have two guests both of whom had terminal illnesses: Peter Short and Nicholas Tonti-Filippini. Unfortunately Nicholas had to withdraw from the program at the last minute, as he was too ill. He passed away a few days later. In his place Margaret Tighe, the president of the Right to Life Australia, agreed to take part in the discussion.

Nicholas Tonti-Filippini had battled a chronic autoimmune disease from the age of 20. He lived until the age of 56. Professor Tonti-Filippini was staunch in his opposition to voluntary euthanasia. He said, “Euthanasia would be a disaster for people like me. I’m dependent on dialysis … I’m well advanced with a terminal condition. If euthanasia was allowed it would put pressure on people in my situation to take that option. So anybody who was terminally ill – anybody who was suffering – they would be under a kind of pressure because the doctors would have to tell them that this was an option, so it would undermine the whole relationship between them and their doctor.  At the moment, the doctors and nurses I see encourage me to keep going with the dialysis.  But if they happen to turn around and say that at this stage of your life you could opt for euthanasia, it would completely undermine the relationship.” (The Age)

Peter Short was an amazing man and we enjoyed good conversation both on and off set. Peter had successfully battled oesophageal cancer in his early 50s but, on 28 January 2014, his 57th birthday, he was told it had returned – terminally. Peter campaigned for euthanasia but in the end he opted for palliative care. He died on 29 December, 2014.

https://petershort.com.au

There are many “fors” and “againsts” in the euthanasia debate and I encourage you to read widely on the subject if you’re interested in knowing more. I guess a great question for all of us to ask is whether ethics are issues or people? If ethics are just issues then we are free to make black and white statements such as, “I’m against euthanasia.” But if ethics go way beyond issues and actually affect people – which they do – then we need to engage with the people who are affected, get to know them and listen to their stories. When we do this we will find that there are many shades of grey and, more importantly, our hearts will be filled with empathy, compassion and love for those who are suffering – and that sounds very much like Jesus to me.

Welcome to winter! It’s a wonderful season in many ways but one of the downsides is the increase of sickness and sadness. SAD stands for Seasonal Affective Disorder and is a type of depression that’s related to changes in seasons, especially when it’s cold and there’s less sunshine. So how do we beat flus and winter blues? Read on for some practical tips.

Recent studies show that the number one way to prevent getting the flu is by having an annual flu vaccine, which reduces the risk of flu illness by about 50-60%. Last year was the first year I didn’t get a flu jab (ironically because my doctor was sick on the day I was booked in to get one) and I ended up getting the worst flu and being off work for 2 weeks (and feeling pretty average for about 6 weeks). Needless to say this year we had a family outing to the doctor and we all got jabbed J. You can’t catch the flu from the vaccine – that’s just a myth. You’ll also need to avoid contact with people who have the flu, wash your hands regularly and avoid touching your face (some viruses can live on surfaces for hours. Regular hand washing is your best strategy to keep them from getting inside your body).

Other ways to beat flus and winter blues include healthy eating and exercise. Plant foods (especially those high in vitamin C like broccoli, kiwi and citrus fruits) contain natural disease fighting compounds that can improve your immune system, so eat lots of vegetables and fruits as well as healthy fats and lean protein, dairy, nuts, seeds and whole grains. Include ginger, garlic, olive leaf extract and green tea in your diet. Don’t “starve a fever”. Make sure you drink plenty of fresh water too. Regular, sensible exercise will stimulate the fighting T cells into doing their job – attacking foreign invaders like germs and viruses. Spending time outside during the day is very important in beating the winter blues (SAD) because of the benefits of sunlight. Taking a vitamin D supplement is important too – and other supplements in addition to a healthy diet. Also get plenty of rest and minimise stress where possible.

If you smoke it’s time to give up! Not only is it bad for your health it’s also bad for your wallet. It’s likely that a packet of 25 cigarettes will cost $40 in Australia by 2020. That’s almost $15,000 a year up in smoke (if you have a packet a day). Smoking is known to worsen the effects of flu and colds as it causes the body to overreact to a virus.

Finally, make sure you don’t change your routine too much in the winter. The temptation for those who live in a colder climate is to hibernate, but this can be ultimately detrimental. A big contributor towards our physical, emotional and spiritual wellbeing is being an active part of a community of people. Resist the temptation to isolate yourself. We’re not meant to live life alone – we’ve been created for community. Join a church, make friends, get involved and volunteer. Being with people and singing together pays huge dividends. A Time Magazine article states, “Researchers are beginning to discover that singing is like an infusion of the perfect tranquilizer, the kind that both soothes your nerves and elevates your spirits.” And of all the musical genres, Gospel music is the one that is particularly effective at lifting a person’s mood.

Wherever possible do the some of the above recommendations together – eat healthily with friends, exercise with others, play board games together and pray with others. Making sure all of these ingredients are in your life will not only reduce your risk of the flus and winter blues, they will also lead you to living the happiest and healthiest life possible.

(Please be sure to always talk with your health care provider if your symptoms persist; before taking any herbal, vitamin, or mineral supplement, or engaging in any strenuous exercise.)

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.