Bible Reading Plans for the New Year

One of the things we often do for the new year is make our New Year resolutions. While we can make fun of people who make the same resolutions each year but never do anything about them, I want to suggest that a little reflection followed by some resolutions can be a good opportunity for all of us.


While Christians know that we can make a fresh start with God anytime, the start of a new year can be a good opportunity to change some of the patterns of life and make the changes that we haven’t felt able to make in the business of the year. I suggested in a recent sermon that two of the habits and patterns we might seek to establish or re-establish for the new year might be our quiet times and our Bible reading programme. Often these two can (and should) be linked.

One of the challenges of establishing a regular Bible reading plan is working out the plan. I find that it helps to use a plan that someone else has put some time and effort into devising. I recently came across a collection of these gathered by Justin Taylor here: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2009/12/30/bible-reading-plans-2/

Another recent article with a revised Bible reading plan is found here:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2010/12/29/two-year-bible-reading-plan/

In particular I recommend the plan I am using this year. It was originally devised by Robert Murray M’Cheyne in 1842. If you read all four readings for each day you read the whole Bible in a year. It can easily be modified so that you read the whole Bible in two years (just read two readings each day). The plan is reprinted in a book by Don Carson, For the Love of God (Vols 1 and 2) which gives a short reflection for each day on one of the readings. Carson’s introduction, which includes a copy of the plan, can be found here: Carson’s Introduction - For the Love of God

Take the plunge and get into a Bible reading plan this year. I pray that God will bless you richly as you listen to his word.

PS.  For a nice online version of the M'Cheyne plan, with links to Biblegateway, check out this page created by Karen & Ben Beilharz.   http://hippocampusextensions.com/mcheyneplan/

A Locust Plague and an Ancient Prophecy

City-dwellers may not have realized, but as well as drought-breaking floods, 2010 has seen the biggest locust plague in Australia for more than 30 years.

According to the Australian Plague locust Commission the peak time for hatching in New South Wales has been October-November, with plague swarms moving across the state and moving to egg-laying in December. Apparently the conditions that produced potentially the best crops in more than a decade (now significantly damaged by floods) are ideal for locusts.

Hearing about the Australian locust situation made me think of the Old Testament book of Joel, which recounts the invasion of Israel / Judah by locusts and the people's response to the consequent warnings from God passed on by the prophet.

The book of Joel is interesting because scholars have long had difficulty determining the date it was made – unlike most OT prophets there is no dating information based on the reining kings or historical events. The locust plagues Joel speaks of could have occurred at almost any date in the history of Israel – from the time of King Solomon to the time after the exile.

Nevertheless, Joel speaks powerfully on a number of topics, including the need to cry out to God in the face of calamity; the need for heart-felt repentance for those who have sinned; the need for communities to repent together and rejoice together when they are delivered. He also pushes us to understand the Biblical meaning of 'The Day of the Lord' and gives the definitive OT prophecy of the outpouring of the Spirit in the 'last days' (quoted by Peter at Pentecost in Acts 2).

The final chapter of the prophecy paints the picture of the end time judgment in the 'Valley of Decision' (Jehoshaphat) on what will be the great and terrible 'Day of the Lord'. Yet the prophecy does not simply end with judgment but points to the fountain that will flow from the house of the Lord. This is picked up in the NT in Revelation 22:1-2 where John sees: 'the river of the water of life, as clear as crystal, flowing from the throne of God and of the Lamb down the middle of the great street of the city.' We also ought to remember the words of Jesus (in John 7:37ff), who said: 'If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him.'

I am not suggesting that reports of a huge locust plague ought to have us jumping to conclusions about the end of the world being nigh – although some so-called 'end times experts' might want to interpret them this way! In fact, Joel's prophecy teaches us to understand every calamity - such as a locust plague, or a Tsunami or even a financial crash – as a kind of mini 'Day of the Lord' – something that ought to warn us to turn back to God and be ready, for the great 'Day of the Lord' is coming. The NT also calls it the day of the Lord Jesus Christ, who will return on that day as the judge of the earth. However that day will come 'like a thief in the night' at a time we cannot predict. (Check out 1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Peter 3:10.)

The prophecy of Joel reminds us that the 'Day of Decision' is coming – when the world will face judgment. Yet those who have turned to the Lord will escape condemnation on that Day. We have also received the blessing of God's spirit poured out on us and since we live in the day of Salvation, can be part of that blessing flow out to the whole world.
If you would like to check out my sermons on Joel, they are available at our church website: www.padstowanglican.org.au/sermons.
1.  Joel 1:1-20 'Cry to God'
2.  Joel 2:1-17 'Return to God'
3.  Joel 2:18-32 'Rejoicing in God'

4.  Joel 3 'In the Valley of Decision'…

PRAY FOR THE PERSECUTED

In our recent series on Hebrews we spent a week thinking about Hebrews 13:3:

Remember those in prison as if you were their fellow prisoners, and those who are mistreated as if you yourselves were suffering.

This Sunday (November 14th) has been billed as the International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church.

Whether you spend this Sunday as a special time of prayer or find some other time, I believe it is important to be informed and to pray (regularly) for our brothers and sisters who are persecuted.

As if on cue, this article appeared in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald, telling the story of Pakistani woman Asia Bibi (Pictured above), who has been convicted of Blasphemy and sentenced to death.

There are too many similar stories in various parts of the world. Helpful websites to find out more about persecution around the world are:

http://www.persecution.org/         International Christian Concern

http://www.persecution.com/       Voice of the Martyrs

http://www.persecution.com.au/   VOM Aust

Fun and Safe Social Networking for Kids

One of the challenges most parents face in the 'internet age' is walking the line between 'access' and safety. When we hear the terrible stories of people abused by 'friends' they have met on social media sites we are rightly cautious about what our kids are doing online.

There are of course precautions we can take when kids are younger, including filtering or blocking software, physical location of computers (in the family room, not the bedroom) and parental supervision. But where do we allow them to go online when they want to start using social networking.

In our house the teenagers use 'facebook'. We rely on their maturity and good judgement - but their parents are also among their FB 'friends'. The pre-teenagers are more likely to be interested in Club Penguin, where each person has a penguin avatar that can interact (to a limited extent) with others. They especially like the races against other penguins (that earn them points).

But what if you want something in between? This review by Sarah Kessler of five 'fun and safe social networks for children' on mashable could be the answer. For the record the five are:

1. Togetherville
2. What's What
3. Scuttlepad
4. Giant Hello
5. Skid-e Kids

While none of these will be perfectly safe, there will probably be something here you will find acceptable. Just remember to keep talking with your kids about what they enjoy (or dislike) about the site.

A Christian Response to Global Warming

I recently took on the challenge of preaching two topical sermons on current ethical issues. The first was Euthanasia (see here) and the second was 'A Christian Response to Global Warming'.

I have to say that the first topic was much easier to tackle - mainly because the Bible has more to say about the topic. But how to tackle the topic of 'Global Warming' (GW)?

I began by doing some research on the scientific views on GW. With some background in science (B Sc in 1986!) I was confident I could get a handle on the issues. What I discovered is that it is not as straightforward as I had thought!

If we accept the argument of Al Gore and friends (from the movie 'An Inconvenient Truth') then an increase in pollution caused by human activity has led to an increase in greenhouse gases - especially Carbon Dioxide. This has led to an increase in the average temperature of the earth by about 0.6 - 0.8 degrees C in the last 40-50 years, or about 1.5 degrees over the last 100 years. The concern is that this increase in temperatures is already having significant negative effects, and that if it continues we could see an increase in the world's temperature of 4-5 degrees in the next 50 years - with catastrophic consequences. (A Short Video by national geographic explaining Global Warming can be found here: Global Warming 101.)

Al Gore claims that the scientific facts are not disputed - which is only partly true. The fact of global warming - the rise in the average temperature of the earth - is generally not disputed. What is disputed more is the cause. More specifically, whether humans are the main cause. There actually seem to be quite a few scientists who have alternative explanations (see for example the arguments of Bob Carter, an Australian from Townsville who does not deny the facts, but the conclusions drawn. His new book is called Climate: The Counter Consenus). The 'international consensus' on human induced global warming is presented here (Australian Government Dept of Climate Change) and here (Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change).

In a short period of time I went from being fairly convinced for Human-caused global warming to very sceptical, and then back to cautiously accepting.

Another side of the issue is to consder the political organisations that are pushing the for an integrated international solution - which generally involves heavy taxing of carbon emissions. Led by the beauracracy of the UN, it is strongly supported by many socialist organisations around the world who are keen to see this as a way to redistribute the world's wealth. At this point we can get into any number of conspiracy theories - many of which I consider crazy! However, there is at least a grain of truth coming from those who warn against handing over power to an unaccountable world-wide beauracracy.

Taking all this into account, I then tried to consider the Christian response. I decided that perhaps the most  important passages are in Genesis 1 and 2 which remind us that God is creator of our world and he has given us an authority over the creation - not an authority to exploit, but rather an authority that involves caring for his creation. Very important is to remember that we are to worship the creator, not the creation, and that in whatever we do we are to see to love both God and our neighbour.

So, I asked, how should we love our neighbour who is possibly affected by Global Warming? I think the answer is that we as individual and as societies ought to take 'reasonable means' to lessen our impact on the creation. Having said that, I am sure that there are more significant issues of exploitation (of people as well as the environment) and pollution that ought to be addressed as a priority over 'carbon emission'. Nonetheless, I believe that in this we ought to err on the side of caution and begin to implement measures that will reduce our the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Here is the outline of my talk:

Archbishop Ussher and the Birthday of the Universe

I was listening to ABC 702 this morning and heard Adam Spencer make the following comment:

"And a happy 27th of October to you all. Perhaps a birthday – an anniversary – the maths extension 1 exam.

Well for some creationists, Oct 27 4004bc is the day of creation itself. I chatted with Dr Mark Harwood from Creation Ministries about what underpins creation theory. Interesting stuff indeed. Hmmmmmmmmmmm."

This was the introduction to an interview (that can be found here) in which Dr Harwood (from Creation Ministries International) did a reasonable job of defending his position as a Young-Earth creationist despite some fairly belligerent interviewing by Adam.

After hearing the interview I checked the facts about Archbishop James Ussher (Archbishop of Armagh, Ireland, 1625 - 1656). Adam should have checked his facts, because Archbishop Ussher calculate that the earth was created about nightfall before October 23rd. 4004 BC. According to Wikipedia:

After a 1647 work on the origin of the Creeds, Ussher published a treatise on the calendar in 1648. This was a warm-up for his most famous work, the Annales veteris testamenti, a prima mundi origine deducti ("Annals of the Old Testament, deduced from the first origins of the world"), which appeared in 1650, and its continuation, Annalium pars postierior, published in 1654. In this work, he calculated the date of the Creation to have been nightfall preceding 23 October 4004 BC (According to the Julian calendar).

 
Now, leaving aside Adam's error, how important is this date? Should we celebrate it as the birthday of the world? Do we have to accept that the world is about 6000 years old if we want to uphold the authority of the Bible as the Word of God (as Dr Harwood implied)?
 
I would suggest that Archbishop Ussher made an overly literalistic interpretation of the date of the creation. Even if the ages given in the genealogies of the Bible can be calculated accurately to give dates for Noah or for Adam, this still does not imply that we can calculate the date of the creation of light to six days before. I would argue that the first two chapters of Genesis are intended to tell us more about the purpose of creation and the nature of the creator rather than the exact order and date. I am therefore prepared to accept the label of  'Old-Earth Creationist' and to accept a possible date for the creation of the earth at over 13 billion years ago.
 
Of course I would still want to argue that the Bible is the word of God that should be read literally. Yet I find the Young-Earh creationists to be a little disturbing in their dogged adherence to such an early date in the face of very significant scientific evidence.
 
While we should not accept everything that scientists claim as 'proven fact', neither should we be scared of science when done within its proper bounds. While the YEC's claim to have rebuttals to much of the 'scientific evidence' for an old earth, it does appear to me to be 'special pleading' bound by a dogmantic and literalistic reading of Scripture. These are the kind of arguments that are usually called 'fundamentalist'.
 
A helpful article by Michael Jensen on 'Fundamentalism' was also released this week on the ABC religion website. Michael warns against the person who claims that their view is purely objective and rational - whether based on Scripture or something else (like Science). Such a person is not prepared to consider the alternative argument. A humble Christianity will always be prepared to consider the merits of the alternative argument - even when it might contradict certain cherished presuppositions or conclusions.
 
Unfortunately the conversation on the radio this morning sounded like a conversation between two different kinds of 'fundamentalists' - although I do think that the Christian was a bit more polite.

Synod Vox Pops

This video by Anglican Media gives you an idea of what attenders think about Synod.

AND Check out this post by Nigel Fortescue for a taste - in fact a highlight!



Synod Vox-pops from Sydneyanglicans.net on Vimeo.

Peter Jensen on 'Being Human in this Glittering City'

In the last week I have been attending the Annual Synod of the Sydney Anglican Diocese. One of the highlights is always the Presidential address given by the Archbishop. This year the address by Peter Jensen was on the topic of 'Being Human in this Glittering City'.

He began by suggesting that this 'glittering city' of Sydney began as an experiment in human nature. "One of the architects of the whole [transportation] scheme was the Home Secretary, Lord Sydney. For him, transportation was not a penalty in itself, and even convicted felons did not lose all the rights of an Englishman. He thought that after a relatively brief settling-in period under the rule of military authority, the new colony would be self-governing, run by morally improved convicts."

In what sense can humans be 'improved' or even 'perfected'? He then goes on to talk about the dream of improving people, including convicts and aboriginals; the education of the early children in the colony before making the point that our view of humanity will have direct implications for how we treat people - like the first Australians, Prisoners, the needy, the dying and the young.  He provided a reflection on the trial of so-called "ethics classes" as a challenge to Special Religious Education (Scripture) and challenged us to rethink our vision for Christian education. He then went on to speak about the financial situation of the diocese and - more importantly - the progress of our mission.

It was a great encouragement to think Biblically about human nature ('Anthropology' for the academics) and to make sure we stick to the gospel mission.  For me the address is the highlight of Synod. Well worth a read or listen!

The full text is available here.

The Audio Version is available here,

and the video is available in two parts on Vimeo, Part 1, and Part 2.

. . . . .

Euthanasia Debate Gathering Steam

I have previously mentioned the warped priorities of the newly empowered Greens to promote Bills to legalise Euthanasia in the Territories and in the NSW Parliament, here.

Andrew Cameron (pictured), of the Sydney Diocese Social Issues Executive has written an article in the Sydney Morning Herald called "Euthanasia Question Needs Wider Discussion" which highlights the shaky basis for the claims made by the pro-euthanasia lobby and calls for a proper debate.

Another approach was taken by Michael Jensen, who wrote a controversial and deliberately provocative piece in Punch called "Who is Euthanasia really For? A Letter from a Loving Son". Worth looking at here.

Another interesting and moving contribution comes from Nikki Savva in the Australian: "Fight for Life to the Last Breath". Niki calls herself a 'conservative leftie' and is not, a far as I know, a Christian. It is a good example of how deeper reflection on the issue can lead to an anti-euthanasia stance. Her article can be found here.

Here is the first part of the article by Andrew Cameron:

Australians are overwhelmingly in favour of euthanasia. Who can resist the will of the people? So goes the pro-death argument for this sweeping social change.


A much quoted 2009 survey, commissioned by the pro-euthanasia group Dying with Dignity, reports 85 per cent support for the practice. As is always the case, support is more muted among the over-65s: the prospect of death, it turns out, does concentrate the mind.

Even so, the survey elicited more than 80 per cent support among each age bracket of its 1201 respondents.

There is just one problem: it consisted of a telephone poll asking a single leading question. Interviewers emphasised the syllables as printed: ''If a hopelessly ill patient, experiencing unrelievable suffering, with absolutely no chance of recovering asks for a lethal dose, should a doctor be allowed to provide a lethal dose, or not?''

Try answering that while you are cooking the dinner or bathing the kids. The question is wildly emotive (''hopelessly'', ''unrelievable suffering'', ''absolutely no chance'').

We hate the thought of death and pain, and in the moment, most of us would simply respond out of shock and without much thought. The question leverages our preference to politely say ''yes'' instead of ''no''.

Its assumptions are also completely contestable. Illness does not have to be ''hopeless'', and suffering is often very relievable. Where euthanasia is legal, more ask for it due to loneliness than pain, or so as not to burden another. The survey therefore distracts us from other options.

It does not ask, ''Would you change your mind if the lonely had companions, and the fearful someone to listen?'' Nor does it ask, ''What would enable people to accept care without shame?'' Nor does it ask, ''Would you like to see more funding for pain management research and practice?''

We are seeing a deliberate blurring of the lines at the very time society needs clarity on such a serious and far-reaching measure. The deliberate killing of a person in euthanasia must be distinguished from the withdrawal of treatment, and from management of symptoms at the end of life. . . .

The rest of the article can be found here.

Muslims Respond to 'Attacks' on Islam - in Sydney

I recently heard about a rally planned for a local park (in Lakemba) for Sunday 19th September organised by 'Various Muslim Community organisations'. Here is what the flyer said:

BANNING THE HIJAB
SLANDERING THE PROPHET (PBUH)
BANNING OUR MINARETS
BURNING THE QUR'AN
ATTACKING OUR MOSQUES

The hijab and niqab have increasinly been under the spotlight in the West and are the subject of attacks by Western media, politicians and academics who portrayed them as being tools of oppression to suppress women. After gaining momentum in Europe, the debate has emerged in Australia with the introduction of a bill into the NSW Legislative Council to criminalise the public wearing of face coverings such as the niqab.

The attack on the niqab does not occur in isolation. It comes at a time in the West when all things Islamic have been, and continue to be, targetted, attached and questioned: Our Prophet (saw), Islamic schools, mosques, the teaching of the Quran in schools, halal food, minarets and Islamic values and practices. Thus the attack on the niqab is not about the niqab itself but is an attack on it as a symbol of Islam. It is Islam itself that Western policy makers and media seek to challenge.

The Muslim community must not, and will not remain silent while matters concerning us are debated by the rest of society. We ask all men, women and children to join us at this important event to defend the honour of our sisters, the sanctity of our Deen, and the adherence to our Islam.

The front of the flyer declared:
It's time to UNITE & STAND WITHOUT FEAR!
STAND UP FOR YOUR ISLAM!
ALL MUSLIMS MUST ATTEND!

The rally was reported in the Sydney Morning Herald HERE. Apparently about 2000 people attended. The event was reported in the following terms:

Islamic values are superior to ''flawed'' Western secular values and non-Muslims are in no position to lecture Muslims about the oppression of women, a speaker said yesterday at a Sydney rally against proposals to ban the burqa.

''Despite the intense negative propaganda against Islam and in particular the lies about its treatment of women, the number of Western women embracing Islam continues to rise at a rapid rate,'' said Fautmeh Ardati, a member of the Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir. ''By turning their backs on this flawed way of life, it is testament of the superiority of Islamic values over Western values.''

First Priority for Bob Brown and the Greens: Euthanasia Laws!

Not long after the Greens in the NSW Parliament have gained an amendment to the Adoption Act to allow gay couples the 'right' to adopt (in preference to the 'rights' of a child to have a mother and a father), federal Greens leader Bob Brown has announced that his first legislative priority in the new Federal parliament will be to change laws which currently prevent the Territories from introducing 'voluntary euthanasia' laws.

Euthanasia was legalised in the Northern Territory, by the (so-called) "Rights of the Terminally Ill Act" in 1995. Soon after, the law was voided by the Commonwealth government by amending the Northern Territory (Self-Government) Act 1978. Before the Commonwealth government made this amendment, however, three people had practiced euthanasia, aided by Dr Philip Nitschke. Brown's goal will be to amend the Northern Territory Act and the corresponding Act for the Australian Capital Territory.

With an increased representation in the federal parliament the Greens are more likely to be able to advance their ultra-progressive and anti-Christian agendas, including Gay rights, Euthanasia, removal of all censorship, removing rights for Christian organisations to prefer to employ Christians and ultimately limiting the ability of Christian groups to proclaim the gospel.

Here is what the article says:

Greens reignite right-to-die debate
SMH September 19, 2010 - 9:57AM
One of the Australian Greens' first parliamentary priorities will be to try to overturn laws which stop the territories from legislating around euthanasia.

Greens leader Bob Brown said today that after ensuring there was more time to debate private member's bills in the new parliament, he would turn his attention to euthanasia laws.

Senator Brown wants to overturn laws that stop the ACT and Northern Territory from legislating on the controversial issue.

"That was a taking away of the democratic rights of the people of the two territories," he told Network Ten.

"This won't bring in euthanasia but it will restore the rights of the territorians to be able to legislate for euthanasia the same as everybody in the states."

Senator Brown said his move was less about discussing the right to die and more about instigating a "full on" debate about territory rights.

Radical Islam Challenges Notions of Freedom

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali was bishop of Rochester in Britain, a member of the House of Lords and bishop of Raiwind in Pakistan. Below is an extract from an article published yesterday in the Australian. In the article he gives a strong but thoughtful challenge to the idea of accepting Sharia in parrallel with Australian (& British) law. At the present time he is in Australia and is giving a number of public addresses. 




Challenging Islam Challenges Notions of Freedom

IT is often thought the main threat of radical Islamism to the West and, indeed, the world, is terrorism. It is also said to be the isolation of Muslim communities, which allows extremists to recruit people to their cause.


Such views are not mistaken but they confuse effects with causes. What the world has to recognise is that we are not simply dealing with faith, but with a political, social and economic ideology. Radical Islamism is a worldview. Its nearest parallel, despite many differences, is Marxism.

Radical Islamists claim their all-encompassing program for society is rooted in fundamental Islamic sources. They reject the interpretations of Koran and sharia law offered by reformist or moderate Muslims. We must, of course, respect the faith of ordinary Muslims, but the ideology has to be met in a different way.

It is basic to Western societies that there should be one law for all. This idea emerged from the Judaeo-Christian tradition that all humans are made in God's image. It has been mediated by the Enlightenment, which emphasised not only dignity but also liberty.

The radical Islamist vision is absolutist. It applies to every area of human life, including politics, business and, above all, law itself. Recent demands by British and some Australian Muslim leaders for the recognition of aspects of sharia law should be seen in this light. Western clergy and jurists who advocate such demands fail to recognise that acknowledging aspects of sharia in public law will lead to a greater involvement with Islamic law.

He Concludes . . .

While we should all be committed to civility in public discussion, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights already provides protection from incitement to religious hatred, which leads to discrimination, hostility or violence. To go beyond this has implications for free speech.

Muslims, like anyone else, should be free to practise and propagate their faith. They are free also to contribute to public debate. The principle of one law for all, however, cannot be compromised. Freedom of expression and the right to change one's belief must be maintained. So must easy access to the courts and police.


The rest of the Article can be found HERE.

Stephen Hawking's new book critiqued by Alister McGrath

Stephen Hawking, the internationally respected scientist, has published a new book, The Grand Design, which famously (already!) declares, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist."


There is a substantial review and critique by English theologian Alister McGrath (whose first doctorate was in Molecular Biology). I have published some of this review at the GodTalkatUWS blog.

The original article can be found HERE.

The Wrong Way to Do Muslim Outreach: An Appeal to Dove Outreach Centre

Dear ministry team at Dove Outreach Centre,

I appeal to you as a fellow pastor and servant of the Lord Jesus Christ not to go ahead with this misguided exercise of burning the Quran.

I also recognise that any worldview or religion that does not accept Jesus as Lord or recognise the Holy Scriptures as the final authority in matters of faith is captive to the devil. However I believe it is incredibly unhelpful to outreach around the world to antagonise Muslims by burning their holy book.

I serve in a part of Sydney, Australia where there is some outreach to Muslims happening and numbers of Muslims becoming disciples of Christ. I want you to understand that your misguided public event is likely to cause greater antagonism between Muslims and Christians and slow the cause of the gospel among Muslims. I am also concerned for friends who are serving in Muslim-majority countries who will be placed in increased danger by your actions - and also for the damage that you will do to the cause of Christ in these lands as outreach work is attacked more vigorously.

I call on you to preach the salvation that is found in Christ alone and to model the peace and forgiveness that can only be found in him.

I will be praying that you repent of this ill-advised intention and that instead you offer your own prayers that we may all live 'peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good and pleases God our saviour, who wants all people to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth . . .' (1 Tim 2:2-4).

I appeal to you in Christ,

Richard Blight
Minister, Padstow Anglican Church,
Sydney, Australia

The contact page for Dove outreach centre (where I sent this appeal) is here. (You might like to add your own).

The SMH article is here:

Richard Dawkins debates John Lennox on 'The God Delusion'

I have recently been thinking about the relationship between Science and Christianity in seeking to answer the question of 'hasn't science disproved Christianity?' (See http://www.godtalkatuws.blogspot.com/.) One of the most famous debates in recent times on the topic was between Professor Richard Dawkins (of Oxford) and Profesor John Lennox (also of Oxford). Held at the University of Alabama in Birmingham in 2008. The topic was specifically the title of Dawkins' book, The God Delusion.

The video can be found here.  The whole debate goes for an hour and 40 minutes (153 MB!). Let me know what you think.

You may be interested to have a look at some of the other work Dawkins is doing. Here is a report on Dawkins' crusade regarding Faith Schools. A series of videos called Faith Schools Menace was released on August 18th.

His own website is here, and his related founndation: "The mission of the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is to support scientific education, critical thinking and evidence-based understanding of the natural world in the quest to overcome religious fundamentalism, superstition, intolerance and human suffering."  Sounds like a crusade to me. No wonder people are calling him a 'fundamentalist'!

How To Protect Our Children Online

I recently came across this very helpful page by Steve Kryger of 'communicatejesus.com' which provides advice and resources to help protect our children while using the internet.  I'm sure you'll find it useful.

Peter O'Brien on Hebrews

We've recently been studying the letter to the Hebrews at church. Here is an 'interview' from the Gospel Coalition website with Peter O'Brien - one of my college lecturers and author of a fantastic commentary on Hebrews. In answering a few short questions Peter gives great insight into the main themes of the letter.

(The sermons can be found at on our church website:  www.padstowanglican.org.au/sermons)

The Goodness of Sex in God’s Plan vs the Sexualisation of Girls

I was interested to see an article this week on the Age website reporting on a conference in Melbourne. The conference was on 'Religion in the Public Square' - an opportunity to consider issues that impact on our wider society.

In some ways it was not surprising that the issue the writer (Barney Zwartz) picked up on was sex. But it was encouraging to see the way that he reported positively on what two of the presenters said.

Barney reported on the presentations made by Melinda Tankard Reist and by mother and son team Patricia and Kamal Werakoon. Melinda Tankard Reist (picture above) is a prolific writer and social commentator with a particular interest in women's issues and bioethics. Among her published works is Getting Real: Challenging the Sexualisation of Girls. Patricia Weerakoon is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Sydney, and the Coordinator of the Graduate Program in Sexual Health. She is a sexuality educator, researcher and therapist, and has developed a media profile as a sexologist. Kamal Weerakoon is the minister of St Mary's Presbyterian church and a Presbyterian chaplain at the University of Western Sydney (Parramatta Campus). Kamal had an adaptation of his presentation published this week in the Age & SMH (The good book's guide to great sex).

Satisfying God’s Honour?

My Apologies for not posting in more than a month!

Stott has shown that in explaining the cross, theologians went through periods where different theories took priority. The early Greek church Fathers explained the cross in terms of Christ's satisfaction of the rights and claims of the devil. The early Latin church Fathers explained the cross in terms of satisfying God's law. A third theory of the atonement was first proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in the eleventh century. (Anselm was an Italian, but became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1093 AD.)

Anselm's great work was Cur Deus Homo? (Why Did God become Man? Completed 1098.) His work is seen as a leading example of medieval 'scholasticism', which was an attempt to reconcile philosophy and theology, Aristotelian logic and Biblical revelation. While Anselm does include some Biblical quotes and considers the Bible a 'firm foundation', his prior commitment is to be 'agreeable to reason'.

Stott summarises Anselm's argument:

Modern Slavery? CPX Interview with Baroness Caroline Cox

Baroness Caroline Cox of Queensbury is a nurse, lecturer, author, advocate, humanitarian and cross-bench member of the House of Lords in Britain. She has lead a rich and full life that would fill the pages of an adventure novel. For decades she has worked to provide relief to people suffering in countries across the globe. Determined not to pontificate from afar, her policy has always to go where the people are and the trouble is at its worst. Her commitment and bravery in the face of real threat and deep discomfort is extraordinary.

This interview focuses on the reality of modern slavery. It is sad to think that despite the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade in Britain led by William Wilberforce, that slavery is such a significant issue around the world - and even in Australia.  Check out this video from CPX, then pray and think about what you can do:


Baroness Cox: Modern Slavery from CPX on Vimeo.

SATISFYING THE LAW??

In Chapter 5 of The Cross of Christ, Stott continues in the discussion of who is satisfied by the cross by asking the question 'Is it the law that is satisfied'?
He summarises this argument succinctly:

Sin is lawlessness (1 Jn 3:4), a disregard for God's law and disobedience to it. But the law cannot be broken with impunity. Sinners therefore incur the penalty of their law-breaking. They cannot simply be let off. The law must be upheld, its dignity defended and its just penalties paid. The law is thereby 'satisfied'.

The strength of this argument is that it recognises the justice or righteousness of God – in that His law is right and true demands an appropriate punishment.

Can a 16 Year-Old Girl Really Do Anything?

It was remarkable to see the reception that 16 year-old Jessica Watson received on her arrival in Sydney on Saturday. Tens of thousands of people turned out to welcome the girl that our Prime Minister called our "newest hero". As someone who has sailed around the world (HMAS Sydney, 1990, 450 foot ship, crew of 225, 6 months, lots of stops!) and experienced some of the challenges of being at sea in rough weather, I have nothing but respect for Jessica's efforts to sail around the world, solo, unassisted in a 34 foot boat in seven months!

Of course Jessica received a great deal of support from her parents and sponsors and was able to be in regular contact through the wonders of satellite communications. Nevertheless she had to face the challenges of solo sailing with all its inherent dangers, including huge seas which apparently knocked her boat over 7 times. It takes a special kind of mental toughness to tackle such a huge endeavour and to persevere to the end.

We might be thinking differently if there had been some accident or disaster. Many more experienced round-the-world sailors have failed in their attempts. Remember Tony Bullimore and Thierry Dubois – rescued by HMAS Adelaide from the Southern Ocean in 1997? Bullimore had to wait 5 days in his upturned boat before being rescued. Another competitor in the same race, Gerry Rouffs, lost his life.

But Saturday was all about celebrating Jessica's success. When the Prime Minister called Jessica a hero, she said:

I'm going to disagree with the Prime Minister. I don't consider myself a hero. I'm an ordinary girl who believed in her dream. You don't have to be someone special, or anyone special to achieve something amazing. You've just got to have a dream, believe in it and work hard.

They are inspiring words, but are they true? They certainly are a great encouragement to young people to dream great dreams and work hard to achieve them. While it is true that not everyone who dreams a dream and really believes in it will achieve their goal, it is also true that people who dream big and work hard to achieve their dream are more likely to achieve something!

This leads me to reflect on what young Christians dream about. Do we encourage our young people to dream great dreams for God and work hard to achieve them? Or are we happy to let them continue on with the same ambitions as the world around them? It is great for the 'old folks' to dream of reaching our city, nation and the world for God – when in reality our capacity to do the new things needed for such a mission are much more limited. But what if our young people started to dream big and started working on being and doing what is necessary to proclaim Christ to everyone around us? What if they were prepared to give up the small ambitions of the world and continue their whole lives working in God's strength to see His kingdom grow? Then we might indeed see great things done for God's kingdom in our own day.

SATISFYING THE DEVIL??

In Chapter 5 of The Cross of Christ, Stott examines a number of traditional views of what 'satisfaction' is achieved on the Cross. Was Jesus satisfying the devil?

The idea that on the cross Jesus satisfied the devil was apparently widespread in the early church. Stott suggests that the early church fathers were sometimes 'extremely injudicious' in the way they presented the devil's power and how the cross deprived him of it.

It is true that the Bible tells us that since the fall, mankind has been in captivity not only to sin and death, but also to the devil. Some of the (post-apostolic) early church fathers therefore thought of him as the major tyrant from whom Jesus came to liberate us.

Stott suggests that, with hindsight, we may detect three errors made by the early church fathers:

The Cross – Who is Satisfied??

Chapter 5 of John Stott's The Cross of Christ is on 'Satisfaction for Sin'. As Stott says, there are no words more likely to cause offence in discussions of the atonement than 'satisfaction' and the related term 'substitution'. He quotes Sir Alister Hardy, former professor of Zoology at Oxford and researcher into religious experience who describes his inability to come to terms with the 'crude' beliefs of many 'orthodox churchmen. Quoting from The Divine Flame (c. 1965) he says:

I feel certain that he [Jesus] would not have preached to us of a God who would be appeased by the cruel sacrifice of a tortured body. . . I cannot accept either the hypothesis that the appalling death of Jesus was a sacrifice in the eyes of God for the sins of the world , or that God, in the shape of his son, tortured himself for our redemption. I can only confess that, in my heart of hearts, I find such religious ideas to be among the least attractive in the whole of anthropology. To me they belong to quite a different philosophy – a different psychology – from that of the religion Jesus taught.'

Stott reminds us that opponents will often caricature the Christian understanding of the Cross in order to more readily condemn it. "The real question", he says, "is whether we can hold fast to the saving efficacy of the death of Jesus, and to its traditional vocabulary (including satisfaction and substitution) without denigrating God". His answer is "I believe we can and must."

Professor John Lennox on the Problem of Suffering and Evil

At a recent outreach at UWS we raised the question of suffering and evil by asking: 'Is God Really Good'

I found this helpful resource at the Centre for Public Christianity (CPX). Professor John Lennox (of Oxford University) discusses the arguments for God's goodness - at both an intellectual and emotional level. I hope it is helpful.


A good God? from CPX on Vimeo.



More videos can be found here:  http://www.publicchristianity.com/Videos/lennox.html

The Problem of Forgiveness - Reflecting on Stott's The Cross of Christ #2

In part two of The Cross of Christ, Stott begins talking about ‘The Heart of the Cross’ by thinking first about ‘The Problem of Forgiveness’. As he says near the beginning of the chapter:

In particular, our insistence that according to the gospel the cross of Christ is the only ground on which God forgives sins bewilders many people. ‘Why should forgiveness depend on Christ’s death?’ they ask. ‘Why does God not simply forgive us, without the necessity of the cross?’

He then goes on to quote the cynical French phrase which translates (roughly): ‘The good God will forgive me; that’s his job.’ This is not far different from the Muslims who wonder why there should be any difficulty in God deciding to forgive sins.

The One Who Meets Our Need (Hebrews 7:26)

Last week I was preparing for a sermon on Hebrews 7 (go here for MP3) and was particularly struck by these words:

²³ Now there have been many of those priests, since death prevented them from continuing in office; ²⁴ but because Jesus lives forever, he has a permanent priesthood. ²⁵ Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them. ²⁶ Such a high priest meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. ²⁷ Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself. ²⁸ For the law appoints as high priests men who are weak; but the oath, which came after the law, appointed the Son, who has been made perfect forever.

It seems that the writer to the Hebrews draws these conclusions from Psalm 110:4 – which he quotes twice in the chapter – and the fact of Jesus' resurrection. To the writer, the resurrection shows that Jesus is the one to whom God was speaking in Psalm 110. In fact, he sees those words as the oath which guarantees Jesus' priesthood (v20-21).

He then draws a number of implications from these observations:

1^st: Because Jesus lives forever, he has a 'permanent priesthood' (v24). Not that Jesus needs to offer his sacrifice over and again, but that he acts as our mediator and advocate before the throne of God on an ongoing and eternal basis.

2^nd: Because of his ongoing intercession with the Father on our behalf, he is able to 'save completely' those who come to God through him (v25). The Greek translated 'completely' is eis to panteles which can be read qualitatively, ie. 'completely' or temporally ie. 'forever'. The context seems to suggest that 'forever' or 'eternally' is the best meaning, but if we are saved eternally, then that implies that we are saved 'completely' as well!

3^rd: Such a high priest meets our need: 'one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens' this all emphasizes his difference to the human Levitical priests – a point which is again made in verse 27 (he does not need to offer the sacrifice for himself, but offers himself); and in verse 28 (the high priest of the oath is not weak like the priests of the law).

This all highlights for me that we sometimes believe we know what we need, but it is God who really knows what we need! In this case we are told that what we really need is a High Priest who is holy, pure, blameless and set apart. I wonder if we don't see this need because we forget the reality of our separation from God – the separation that in the OT law was shown by the physical separation of the unclean and un-sanctified from entering God's presence as signified in the Most Holy Place. In other words, we forget that we are sinners and that God is Holy, and that there is not normally any way for us sinners to approach the Holy God. The only way we can even begin to contemplate such a possibility is because we have Jesus, the Son, as our High Priest who has offered himself to God for us.

How much more amazing then does that make the statement back in Hebrews 4:16

Let us then approach the throne of grace with confidence, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help us in our time of need.

How amazing to be able to approach God with confidence through faith in Jesus – knowing that God will give us mercy and grace!

Perhaps we might think of this next time we sing the last verse of Charles Wesley's great hymn 'And Can It Be':

No condemnation now I dread;
Jesus, and all in Him, is mine;
Alive in Him, my living Head,
And clothed in righteousness divine,
Bold I approach th'eternal throne,
And claim the crown, through Christ my own.

John Stott on the Cross of Christ

In preparation for Mid Year Conference I have been re-reading John Stott's classic book The Cross of Christ. It's not just a classic because it was published in the 80's! (It was first published by IVP in 1986). It is a classic because it is a clear yet profound study of the central doctrine of the Christian faith - Jesus' work on the cross (also called the atonement).



You can read some reviews written for the Twentieth Anniversary edition here. The book is also a classic because it has been constantly in print for over twenty years - being reprinted almost every year! If you aren't sure about buying your own copy then just ask an older Christian -they are likely to have a copy on their shelves. But I warn you, this is a book you will want to own yourself and re-read a number of times. In re-reading the book I have found it still fresh and very relevant.

The book is divided into four main parts:

Welcome

Welcome to my new site "Deep Conviction". I hope to be able to encourage my readers with reflections on the Bible, practical theology and Christian living, ministry and mission in suburbia – in my case in the Suburbs of Sydney, NSW, Australia.
The name comes from 1 Thessalonians 1:4-5. Paul says:

For we know, brothers loved by God, that he has chosen you, because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction.

The goal of my blogging is that the gospel might impact both myself and others with 'deep conviction' that effects and challenges every area of our lives.
If you find anything interesting, encouraging or even disagree, then please feel free to comment!