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

A Tradition

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

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

Compelled to Pray

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

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

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

A Solution

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

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

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

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

Inclusion and Diversity

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

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

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

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

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

Child Abuse

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

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

Lobbying Against Marriage Equality

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

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

Treatment of Women

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

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

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

Preaching the Wrong Message

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

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

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

But Look at all the Good

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

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

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

The Pandemic

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

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

But There’s More!

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

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

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

 

 

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

Woke is a word that has enjoyed a revival in recent times, along with a significant change of meaning. It’s a word I’ve used for years to mean the progression of arising from sleep, as in, “I woke up.” But these days, it’s become an insult that is particularly popular with conservatives, including conservative Christians. So, let’s explore the meaning of woke and find out if I really am a woke bloke.

How it started

Woke was first used by Blues singer Lead Belly in 1938. Lead Belly’s “stay woke” encouraged black people to be vigilant to physical danger. The word was then adopted into Black slang from the 1940s onwards.

The expression “stay woke” became popular on Twitter about a decade ago as a hashtag encouraging people to stand up for those on the margins of society, especially the victims of systemic racism. Woke was also adopted by white people who wanted to stand with their black brothers and sisters in their fight for justice.

Woke gets hijacked

But at the same time, woke was being co-opted by other white people as a derogatory replacement for political correctness. And that’s the way woke is mainly used and understood nowadays. I’ve had this sneer thrown at me a few times when I’ve stood up for marginalised people.

When I speak out for refugees or the LGBTIQA+ community (or any other victims of discrimination), I’m woke.

When I wrote blogs to counter some bizarre conspiracies at the height of the recent pandemic, I was denounced as woke. One Christian leader dubbed me “that woke pastor from Melbourne.” The word has become a condescending insult to dismiss anyone perceived as being a politically correct lefty.

But I like Merriam-Webster’s definition the best, that woke people are “aware of and actively attentive to important facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice).” That meaning describes my worldview and how I live and should define any genuine Jesus follower. So yes, I truly am a woke bloke!

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

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

Feedback

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

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

Welcome to Country

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

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

Acknowledgement of Country

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

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

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

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

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

An Awful Nightmare

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

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

Have you imagined that?

How did it make you feel?

Outraged, I hope!

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

Nobody’s Land

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

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

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

The Future

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

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

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

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

Angry Jesus

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

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

Southern Baptist Report

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

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

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

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

Righteous Anger

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

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

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

Out of Control

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

Whenever there is an election, I am reminded of the little some quarters of the church have learned about how detrimental to the Gospel it is for churches and church leaders to make polarising political statements.

While Christian people have as much right as anyone to engage with politics or stand for political office, the church MUST be above politics, non-partisan, and stick to its central message – the good news about God’s love and forgiveness through Jesus Christ. Anything that clouds that message is an enemy of the Gospel.

Too Political

Several years ago, the Barna Foundation commissioned research amongst young adults (16-29) to discover why they didn’t engage with a church. One of the six reasons was that the church was “too political.”

So, I find it gobsmacking that some Christians and church leaders are still making politically divisive statements and actions even though the evidence is that this harms the cause of Christ.

Christian Values?

A while ago, I saw a post on a pastor’s Facebook page encouraging their followers/congregation to “Let righteousness reign. Put Labor and the Greens last!” I realise this reflects many conservative Christians’ views, but what message does this send to people who may disagree? What about people who do vote Labor or The Greens and still love Jesus? What about people in the broader community who consider Jesus and Church, but are then put off by this statement? Isn’t the Gospel inclusive, or do you have to change how you vote when you become a Christian? Also, why is it “righteous” to vote for a conservative party?

This same leader posted the following chart compiled by the Australian Christian Values Institute.

The Christian Values Checklist informs voters of what each political party stands for on various issues. If you’re a genuine Christian, the report concludes that you’ll vote for Australian Federation, One Nation, or Christian Democrats. If you can’t stomach any of those parties, then United Australia, the Nationals or the Libs would be your choice. But whatever you do, “Let righteousness reign. Put Labor and the Greens last!”

A Closer Look

Let’s examine those Christian values. Predictably they’re what you’d expect from conservative Christianity in Australia, highly influenced by American Evangelicalism. In this tradition, the two main things Christians should focus on are anything to do with abortion or gay people (stop both as much as you can).

While the chart helps you understand what various parties advocate on these issues, I can’t help but notice the missing things. Are not refugees, the homeless, those living with a mental illness, and victims of domestic violence unworthy of the Christian vote? And which party/parties would have the best policies to help those on the margins of society? It also appears that poverty and the environment (points 18 and 19) were tacked on as an afterthought! Maybe I’m wrong, but are they less important than opening parliament with Christian prayer (point 5)? Didn’t Jesus warn people about standing up and repeating rote prayers publicly?

How Should I Vote?

So, with this in mind, here are four things to consider each time you vote:

  • Have the courage to look through fresh eyes. I was born and raised in a conservative British family. My parents voted conservative and Liberal all of their lives. For many years I followed their example. But I dared to look through fresh eyes.  In the famous words of Jim Wallis, sometimes “The Right gets it wrong, and the Left doesn’t get it.” Chat with people who see things differently from you. Ask questions. Listen. Learn. I’m a political moderate (centrist) and a swinging voter these days.
  • Exercise the privilege of a democratic choice. I’ve heard some well-intentioned (but misguided) Christians say that they don’t vote because they believe in leaving the selection of a government up to God Himself. It sounds spiritual but doesn’t consider that God isn’t registered with the Australian Electoral Commission, and neither is Australia a Theocracy! Exercise the privilege of a democratic choice. Express your voice through your vote.
  • Ask, “What is important to me?” But don’t stop there. What is important to us will invariably reflect our passions and life circumstances. But what about others, especially those on the margins, those in Scripture that Jesus showed the most concern?  Paul wrote, “Each of you should look not only to your own interests but also to the interests of others.“ Being like Jesus means we will be interested in the people he showed interest in ~ people who were homeless, sick, or in prison. The poor, orphans and widows. Those living with a disability or who are the victims of domestic violence.

Our vote must not just reflect selfish concerns of personal comfort but should support those who will show love and care towards the most vulnerable, the least powerful, in our community. Beyond that, Christians believe God created this world and gave it to people to look after. And so, we will consider policies that care for the environment when we vote.

  • You vote for your LOCAL member. We don’t vote for the person who will become Prime Minister or Premier. We vote for our local members.

Finally, be realistic. No ONE political party or candidate will tick every box, so don’t expect them to, or you will be constantly disappointed. Democracy is not a perfect political system, but it is better than some alternatives.

 

 

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

How Do You Say … ?

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

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

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

Etymology

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

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

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

The Snakebite

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

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

The Anti-venom

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

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

The crowd:                  Share your stuff.

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

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

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

Contentment

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

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

Generosity

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

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

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

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

In the Beginning

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

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

Merisms

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

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

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

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

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

Beyond the Binary

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

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

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

Hebrew Terms

Hebrew tradition includes the following genders:

The androgynos person has both male and female characteristics.

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

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

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

Jewish Tradition

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

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

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

God’s Gender

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Campfire Stories

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

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

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

A Question Book

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

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

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

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

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

Another Conversation

God: “Where is your brother Abel?”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Central Truth

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

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

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

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

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

An Example

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

I deserved that promotion.

I feel angry. Envious. Cheated.

There’s no justice in the world.

These are not evil thoughts. They are valid.

These moments are going to happen.

I won’t deny them; I acknowledge them.

I will chat it through with a friend.

I will bring it to God in prayer.

There are no taboo reflections.

But I won’t let them fester inside me.

They don’t define me.

I don’t have to act on them.

The Heart of the Story

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

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

Over the past few years, I’ve become increasingly uncomfortable with the notion that God killed Jesus, as I had been led to believe. The teaching went something like this:

God loves you but is also angry with you because of your sin. Because God is just, he can’t simply forgive you. God’s justice must be satisfied. And so, because he loves you, he decided not to punish you but rather punish his Son. If you believe this, you no longer need to bear God’s wrath. The penalty of your sin was paid by Jesus. If you reject this, you still need to take the punishment of God’s anger with you as a sinner. God will put you in hell and torture you forever and ever. But, don’t forget, God loves you.

I believed it. I preached it. But then I sensed the gentle nudging of the Holy Spirit to dig deeper and find out if this really is an accurate representation of the gospel, the good news. I don’t believe it is. I mean, what loving parent would punish their own child for the wrongdoing of another?

Is Justice Greater than God?

The doctrine I have described is called (theologically) the penal substitution atonement theory. It makes God somehow less than God. Notice how God loves you and wants to save you, but he can’t until His justice is satisfied. That makes justice greater than God. Justice is in charge here, and God becomes its servant.

Consider the gospel presented by Jesus in the Parable of the Loving Father (Luke 15:11-32). What if the father looked out for his Prodigal Son, saw him, ran to him, and then stopped and thought, “I can’t just accept him back. Someone else has to be punished first.” The father takes the older son, whips him, kills him, and then welcomes the prodigal home having “satisfied” his justice.” Somehow, I don’t think that parable would be so celebrated anymore!

But that’s not Jesus’ story. Instead, a loving father welcomes his sinful son with no questions asked. He’s not particularly interested in the son’s repentance speech. He is simply overjoyed the lost lad has returned. The father welcomes him with open arms, grants him access to the family finances (the ring), and throws a party. Of course, the older brother is miffed, just like some Christians will be with this blog. How could God be THAT good and grace be SO amazing?

Paul tells us that “God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them.” (2 Cor. 5:19). With that background in mind, let me offer you what I believe to be more valid reasons why Jesus died on the cross. Please note that this is not an exhaustive list.

Extravagant Love

Jesus’ death on the cross was an undisputed act of extravagant, gracious love. Today we have lost much of the horror of first-century crucifixion. People wear crosses around their necks and display pictures of the cross on walls in their homes. But in Jesus’ time, it was an awful symbol of Roman tyranny and cruelty. In the light of this, the first-century church transformed the meaning of this symbol by speaking of the cross as proof of God’s love, “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). In Greek Mythology, Cupid, the god of desire and love, is seen as shooting an arrow to pierce a human heart. We still use this symbol today to denote when a person falls in love. Jesus was pierced not with arrows but with nails to show how much God has fallen in love with you!

Empathy

“If there’s a loving God, why is there so much pain and suffering in the world”? The answer to the question is the Cross.

Jesus, the God-Man, experienced human suffering at its most extreme. During a crucifixion, the victim felt some of the most intense pain that a person could feel. He also experienced intense shame. The world of Jesus’ Day valued personal honour, as eastern cultures still do today. Men were crucified naked (women weren’t crucified) in public places, so victims were subjected to as much shame as possible. Rome reserved crucifixion for the worst criminals, especially those who stirred up a rebellion against the state. Pilate’s sign above Jesus on the cross – “The King of the Jews” – revealed that he was considered a rebel and a threat to Rome. There was to be no king but Caesar.

In experiencing suffering and shame, Jesus empathised with the entire human race. God could have remained in the safety and comfort of heaven, but because of his great love for us, he was born into the human family to experience life as we do. We have a high priest who can empathise with our weaknesses (Hebrews 4:15). He understands; he sympathises.

Freedom

Jesus’ final meal with his disciples before the crucifixion was celebrated at The Passover. They thanked God for Israel’s deliverance from slavery in Egypt and prayed for him to liberate them again – this time from Roman oppression. It was at this meal that Jesus said, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many” (Mark 14:24), a statement that would have seemed quite shocking to Jesus’ hearers. The Passover was always about God and what he had done, but here Jesus makes it all about himself – “My body … My Blood.” In this statement, Jesus declared himself to be the God-Man making a New Covenant with people. And just like the Old Covenant between God and Israel had been ratified with blood (Exodus 24:7-8), the New Covenant would be confirmed with blood; the blood of a sinless man to set them free.

Death, Sin, & Satan

Jesus’ death gained freedom from death, sin, and Satan. Consider Hebrews 2:14, “by his death he might break the power of him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil—and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death.”

Several of the church fathers described the cross as a fish hook. Rufinus wrote: “[The purpose of the incarnation] was that the divine virtue of the Son of God might be like a kind of hook hidden beneath the form of human flesh…to lure on the prince of this world to a contest; that the Son might offer him his human flesh as bait and that the divinity which lay underneath might catch him and hold him fast with its hook.”

Rufinus’ contemporary Gregory of Nyssa said that the devil, “like a greedy fish…swallow[ed] the Godhead like a fish-hook along with the flesh which was the bait.” Jesus’ body is the bait, but inside him is the divine nature which is the hook. Once the devil swallows God, he is in real trouble. He cannot digest or defeat God’s eternal life. What a powerful picture.

As we approach Good Friday and Easter, I encourage you to think about these life-changing truths. Jesus visited death and returned. He’s become the ultimate tour guide through this life and into the next. My prayer is that you open yourself to God’s love and grace and receive all that Jesus has done for you.

Palm Sunday marks Jesus’ triumphant entry into Jerusalem, an event so significant that it’s recorded across all four gospels.

The Background

Lazarus was recently brought back to life, so five days before Jesus’ crucifixion, on the eve of Palm Sunday, Jesus shared a celebratory meal with Lazarus and his sisters, Martha and Mary. During dinner, Mary anointed Jesus with perfume, filling the house with aroma and provoking strong reactions.

As Jesus’ popularity increased after Lazarus’ resurrection, religious leaders grew more jealous, eager to oppose Him, and even tried to kill Lazarus because many Jews believed in Jesus because of him. I wonder how Lazarus felt—having been brought back to life, only to find his life under threat.

Stop the donkey!

Early on Palm Sunday, Jesus sent two disciples to a village to fetch a donkey and its colt. Jesus was the first to ride the young colt. After he rode into Jerusalem, both animals were returned to their owner.

This act was significant: officials rode donkeys for civil, not military, parades—armies used horses and chariots. So, Jesus’ choice to ride a young donkey carried deep symbolic meaning.

Unrealistic Expectations

Palm Sunday falls five days before Passover, the Jewish feast celebrating God’s deliverance of Israel from slavery in Egypt. The crowd expected Jesus to lead them against the Romans and to bring salvation to Israel as Moses did.

The excitement was clear. As the crowd paid royal homage to King Jesus by laying garments, waving, and scattering palm branches, they also sang words from The Great Hallel, Psalms of praise (111-118) commonly used at Passover.

Hosanna!

Lord, grant us success!

Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.

From the house of the Lord, we bless you.

The Lord is God,

And he has made his light shine on us.

With boughs in hand, join in the festal procession

up to the horns of the altar. (Psalm 118:25-27)

In proclaiming these praises, it’s important to understand that Hosanna means “save now” or “save, I beg you.” The people weren’t just celebrating—they were proclaiming Jesus as king and trying to force his hand to overthrow Rome and establish the kingdom of God.

Another Kingdom

However, Jesus had already taught that His kingdom was not of this world. Salvation would not come through military strength, political influence, or geographical location, but from within—changing the heart. This had been Jesus’ mission from the outset: to preach good news to the poor, proclaim liberty for prisoners, recover sight for the blind, set the oppressed free, and announce the year of the Lord’s favour. (Luke 4:18-19).

Many in Israel missed the Messiah because he delivered an unexpected message. This still happens today when we look for a Saviour made in our image rather than recognising Jesus’ true identity.

  • A Deliverer who will promptly meet all my needs.
  • A Messiah who supports a particular political party.
  • A defender who backs MY opinion on every subject.
  • A Champion who has nothing to do with certain types of people.

If you are looking for Jesus to be any of these things, you’ll be very disappointed.

I encourage you to revisit this remarkable story with fresh eyes. The heart of Palm Sunday is to recognise Jesus for who he truly is, not for what we expect of him. Resist redefining the Messiah to fit your desires; seek to know him as he is.

 

(Updated: 23 March, 2026)

Without question, some of Jesus’ sayings are alarming. I was particularly intimidated as a young Christian by the wide gate and broad road leading to destruction.

Jesus said, Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate, and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

At the time, the church I attended leant towards legalism and understood many of these sayings through that lens. After all, small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. With the emphasis on only a few find it. Catch that? Just a few. Not many. You may be left out. At least, they were the words that echoed in my young Christian mind.

So, is Jesus trying to scare the hell out of us? Let’s find out.

Hit the Nail on the Head

The Sermon on the Mount serves as context (Matthew 5-7). Jesus explains in chapter seven the critical nature of hearing and acting on his message. Thus, we see numerous examples throughout this chapter that serve as a contrast between two groups:

  1. Two types of gates ~ wide and small
  2. Two kinds of roads ~ broad & narrow
  3. Two sorts of trees ~ Good and bad (fruit)
  4. Two classes of disciples ~ true and false
  5. Two kinds of builders ~ wise and foolish

Jesus is expressing the same thing in each of these analogies and uses various images to emphasise his point, similar to repeatedly striking a nail with a hammer until it is deeply embedded in the wood. That is to say:

Entering through the wide gate is the same as

Travelling on the broad road, which is the same as

Bearing bad fruit, which is the same as

Being a false disciple, which is the same as

Being a foolish builder.

The opposite is also true:

Entering through the small gate is the same as

Travelling on the narrow road, which is the same as

Bearing good fruit, which is the same as

Being a true disciple, which is the same as

Being a wise builder.

Two Kinds of People

Jesus ends his sermon with The Parable of the Wise and Foolish Builders, a reference to these two kinds of people who all hear Jesus’ words and teachings:

Group one “hears these words of mine and puts them into practice,” while group two “hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice.”

Group one is “like a wise man who built his house on the rock,” while group two “is like a foolish man who built his house on sand.”

Both groups (houses) experience the same trials and storms in life, “The rain came down, the streams rose, and the winds blew and beat against that house.”

Group one’s house “did not fall, because it had its foundation on the rock.” So is everyone who hears Jesus’ teachings and puts them into practice.

Group two’s house “fell with a great crash.” So is everyone who hears Jesus’ teachings but does not act on them.

The Gospels preserve Jesus’ teachings, while the other New Testament writers expound them further to demonstrate how his teachings apply in daily life. Among the points made by these authors is the following:

You don’t enter the kingdom of heaven by doing good works; you enter the kingdom of heaven by doing God’s will.

That is where the “Many” Jesus refers to have made a grievous error. Their justification for being admitted to the Kingdom of Heaven is based on the excellent actions they have performed. They have prophesied, cast out devils, and performed miracles, but these are manifestations of God’s power at work through a person, not proof of genuine trust in Christ.

Kingdom access is, according to Jesus, for the person “who does the will of My Father in heaven.” What is God’s will? Jesus taught, “my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.” We enter God’s Kingdom through trust in Jesus! Only through faith in Jesus can we hear and apply his teachings. While good deeds spring from genuine faith, they do not guarantee admission to the kingdom.

Two Stories

As the late Billy Graham put it: “There were a few times when I thought I was dying, and I saw my whole life come before me. I didn’t say to the Lord, ‘I’m a preacher, and I’ve preached to many people.’ I said, ‘Oh Lord, I’m a sinner, and I still need Your forgiveness. I still need the cross.’ And I asked the Lord to give me peace in my heart, and He did – a wonderful peace that hasn’t left me.”

I’ll finish this with a story about a man who died and went to heaven. Of course, St. Peter met him at the pearly gates and explained, “Here’s how it works. You need 100 points to make it into heaven. Let me know all the good things you’ve done, and I’ll give you a certain number of points for each item, depending on how good it was. When you reach 100 points, you’ll get in.”

“Okay,” said the man, “I was married to the same woman for 50 years and never cheated even in my heart.” “That’s wonderful,” said St. Peter, “that’s worth three points!”

“Three points?” he says. “Well, I attended church all my life and supported its ministry with my tithe and service.” “Terrific!” said St. Peter, “that’s certainly worth a point.”

“One point? Gosh. How about this: “I started a soup kitchen in my city and worked in a shelter for homeless veterans.” “Fantastic, that’s good for two more points.” “TWO POINTS!!” the man cried, “At this rate, the only way I get into heaven is by the grace of God!”

“Come on in,” said Peter.