On Second Thoughts

The Programmer’s Revenge

2011-12-14T09:48:00.001+11:00

A picture tells a thousand words…

A Bun in the Oven

2011-04-20T22:25:00.001+10:00

The things you learn...

Easter is not an especially Christian word. English-speaking Christians adapted it from a pagan festival that was already celebrated in April in their neck of the woods; they kept the name, but dropped the fertility goddess Eostre. It’s thought that this is why those Easter bunnies keep breeding each year, despite the vigorous efforts of countless children to exterminate them - they, along with their eggs, are fertility symbols that were held over from the old festival. Easter is after all about new life, so the symbols still worked, even if in a different way.

A fertility goddess named Eostre - well, it made me wonder about oestrogen, the hormone that’s so crucial in enabling women to bear children. Surely the
term came from the same source. And that, of course, made possible the delightful pun at the top of this article. Unfortunately, my guess was wrong. Oestrogen comes from the Greek term for gadfly or madness.

Don’t blame me, the Internet said it, so it must be true!

How to Sound Interesting

2011-04-20T22:22:00.001+10:00

This one's worth remembering every now and then.

I think I rely too much on some of these and not on others. That ought to change.

This One’s For Ryan, Because He’s Got Too Much Time On His Hands (Right?)

2011-04-18T23:51:00.001+10:00

Here's the trick: clues marked with an asterisk need to be 4-across before entering them.

But relax - 14, 23-across applies.

Across

1 Make no sound (5)
4 Voicing opinion reveals OK Corral itself (9)
8* Too‐hip cat is florid (9)
9 Unknown driver takes pole in tricky manoeuvre (5)
10, 1‐down* Heathen erred all over the place?! (4, 3, 5)
11* Roughly how fast plenty of 27‐down‐ing could make you, at best (5, 1, 4)
14, 23‐across For sure the reader preserves a yellow‐throated hake, initially at Niagara Falls, but not even fair to use tin! (3, 3, 3, 4, 5)
16* Wonder from the pits (3)
17 Top class business backer (1. 1.)
20 What she held back (2)
22* Small leak (3)
23 See 14‐across
25 Police have the right to take it for a spin?! (10)
26* Part of our digital culture?! (4)
28* Did Thomas find Henry hard to satisfy? (4)
29 King Herod to provide the appetisers (9)
30 Add standard condiments to mashed pear: wet or dry? (9)
31* Source of water everywhere: it's ice! (4)

Down

1 See 10‐across
2 The study of a heretic worth the cost of 29‐across, perhaps? (8)
3 On top of Cleveland grout (4)
4 With nod to Bond girl(s), we look fearful (7)
5 Tight end drew flag for holding (7)
6* Time for 17‐across' trailer, perhaps? (2, 6)
7* Think about gravity failing, sir! (6)
12 Game with no first turn (3)
13* Creature could be a real find (4)
15 A silent remnant (3)
16 Could spend packet blaming second language (4)
18* Also known as a stone fruit, inappropriately (10)
19* Like All in the Family?! (8)
21* Chop nut in half (3)
22* Extra gold plating after 25‐across started up! (4)
23 Climber's final rest could not be more fey (3, 4)
24* He lets one put bet in ‐ at our odds… ?! (1, 6)
25* ...Two‐to‐one's the spot for this hound (6)
27* Almost the length of the bath (3)

One for the Fans

2011-02-28T08:20:00.001+11:00

Not quite so cruel this time – I’ve even included a hint! The six pink boxes in the upper right corner of the grid, reading from the left and then turning down, spell out the inspiration for this one in an appropriately non-linear way…

And yes, the numbering is correct.

Across

1 Carry odd empty pot to tomb (5)
2, 14, 26-across One who takes along the fish designed to reach the stars?! (5,2, 5)
4 See 25-down
5 One that did not return, one that did, top chap, honest (5)
7 For some respect I've found a new angle on things (11)
11 Model sparred a round without red herring (5)
13 Speak cattily about me or Green (6)
14 See 2-across
17 Half of what Tom said to the setter (2)
18 To knock around with Jo and Uncle Noel (6)
19 Dense sound (5)
21 Drunk pig rattles harpy in stonework (11)
23 Lone wolf to take lad in?! (5)
24 His rector would settle for his singing! (9)
26 See 2-across
27 Angel, the psychic, has gout and amputates (5)

Down

1 Pin one out of pride - that's a thought! (7)
3 A multi-level home that sounds like you'd never feel comfortable? (5, 2, 6)
6 Roommate ships out for a complete change (13)
8 To go out and about - may return without a measure of material in regular pattern (13)
9 Got half a dozen points right for inspector (6)
10 Print club hurt (7)
12 Salesman covers area of cold-blooded types... (8)
15 …receives setback to his goal at first, instead offering new season patterns (13)

16 Set off boredom in unearthly fashion? (8)
20 The first rat already ate every layer (6)
21 Set off boredom in unearthly fashion? (8)
22 Make a mockery of medicine - or unhappy ending (7)
25, 4-across Eagle reports inns in disarray, impossible shapes designed 8-down (7, 9)

A Diversion

2011-02-15T16:56:00.001+11:00

How might one profitably spend a day off? I don’t know, but this certainly was fun…

* I should probably mention that there is a theme, and that the theme affects how 15 of the grid entries appear. Not 16, though it could have been. And not 15 of the answers, because some answers are split on the grid.

Across

5 The underhanded action that strained trans‐Tasman relations rose, perhaps? (4)
7 Before rink widened alarmingly, 10‐down played there (2, 4, 6)
9 Sit around all weekend and sketch (4)
11, 26‐down In the manner of 4‐down, how to share a pair of model vases taken to a fight (4, 3, 4, 5)
12, 10‐down Actor from Casino influenced by 31‐across, perhaps (4, 5)
14 Live with decent Cage film (2, 3)
15 13‐down on trial, done for speed (8)
17 Near purchase 14‐across (2)
18 Can Orient Express carry this luggage ‐ it could go either way! (9)
20 A two‐way street leads to house, for example (2)
23 See 21‐down
25 Consider 32‐across upset about nothing (5)
26 Songwriter for Valli's group didn't use 5/4 as an outlet (4)
28 At the Beginning, God was eons creating, with this the likely result! (2, 4, 2, 3)
29 The note says what to do in a lifeboat (4)
31 Accurate from the start?! (5, 2, 5)
32 Great Dane had to go for a walk on the beach, or go 21‐down! (4)

Down

1 Take a stick to put down insurrection, and you'll end up with a shambles (8)
2 Father hangs around mixed pairs with kin, then takes off with ground pepper (7)
3 False attitude to entail getting into team (5)
4 Reflecting the sense of 16‐down, appropriately (9)
5 A group usually represented by its elders, so not about to take direction! (1, 1, 1)
6 9‐across a brilliant vehicle to turn into an art form (5)
8 All over with principal Oz dog found in capital after tipoff (4, 4, 2, 3)
10 See 12‐across
12 Positive hamburger is available in jail (2)
13 Come aboard yacht at the outset to reach the isle (3)
16 Now take the theme! (9)
19 Averse to a drawback?! (8)
20 The inspiration for first Beatles' hit, some say (1, 1, 1)
21, 23‐across A place to shelter from the storm, when muffled thunder on several sides surrounds the street (5, 3, 5)
22 Material used in shipping 18‐acrosses comprised of brown, unfinished paper (7)
24 Reported for intra‐venous drug use (2)
26 See 11‐across
27 Influenced by the vibe of the king's choice of footwear... (5)
30 … I met cobbler at his store (3)

Season’s Greetings: Fit For a King

2010-12-25T00:34:00.001+11:00

A sermon based on Matthew 2:1-12

According to legend, Theseus was the son of the King of Athens, who volunteered himself as a human sacrifice. Every nine years, the city of Athens was forced to send a tribute of seven men and seven women to be given as food to the Minotaur of Crete, a horrible monster, half-man, half-bull. Each decade, the flower of the youth of Athens was lost, and Theseus was determined to make an end to the Minotaur.

Through courage, inventiveness, and his spunky good looks, Theseus won the heart of Cretan princess Ariadne, and won victory over the creature. When his ship returned home, there was understandably great rejoicing in Athens, for they were free of their terrible burden.

They commemorated Theseus’ victory by preserving the ship he sailed in – for centuries, according to the ancient historian Plutarch. Over the years, however, the ship began to rot away – so as each plank grew unsound, the Athenians would replace it with a fresh one.

But this was Athens, the city of the philosophers, and it wasn’t long before someone wondered: if every plank of the ship had been replaced, was it still the Ship of Theseus? Or was it a new ship altogether?

The Ship of Theseus is one of the world’s oldest paradoxes. There are books written about different opinions on the matter. In the end, though, it’s fairly academic. It was only a boat.

But tonight we remember another paradox, of similar antiquity, but much greater significance. It’s the paradox of one king holding court from a feeding trough, while another king is caught with his nose in it. It’s the paradox of the first Season’s Greetings being offered by dumb animals. It is, as we saw, the paradox of Christmas.

There is much about the first Christmas that appears to make no sense – either to us, or to those who were there to witness it. And tonight, as well as tomorrow morning, we’re going to explore the paradox by seeing how different people reacted to the news – what kind of greeting they offered the season of the Christ’s birth.

We’ll start with the wise men. We sometimes sing about them as three kings, although the Bible never calls them that. It’s ironic, because what we are told is that they have come to worship a king. They’re foreigners, from somewhere in the East, which makes their visit an unusual occurrence. Dropping in on your enemies – well, that’s what neighbouring countries always were by default in those days – dropping in on your enemies to wish their new king well…it’s pretty remarkable.

You’d have to think it’s safe to assume that these guys didn’t travel the world offering gift packs to every royal heir who was born. They’ve come to see this one, this one especially. That’s what they call him – ‘the one’, the one who has been born king of the Jews.

These guys have worked out that this one matters. And because he matters, they want to treat him that way. They’ve come to worship him, to recognise his worth, his importance. It’s just what you’d expect the appropriate greeting to be if the king of the world had been born. Their actions are fit for a king.

What’s more, there’s a joke that Matthew’s included at Herod’s expense. When the wise men turn up looking for directions, Herod’s research unit finally provides the answer by quoting the prophet Micah, specifically the second verse of chapter 5. If they’d mentioned the third or fourth verse, they’d have read out Micah’s prediction that the arrival of Israel’s promised king would be marked by … you guessed it … the arrival of people from outside Israel to acknowledge him.

And if they’d read the first verse, there’s one more indicator: that the current king of Israel would be the recipient of a slap on the cheek.

Well, there’s an excuse to see how Herod takes the news. ‘Disturbed’ is the word that Matthew used to describe his reaction. He’s a bit churned up over it. He needs to know more, so he calls his crack team of researchers together. And this, in itself, is an indictment of King Herod. The core responsibility of a Jewish king was supposed to be that he would know his Bible well, so that he could his people in obedient lives that honoured God. Herod should have had no difficulty in finding the words from Micah himself. Indeed, given how violent his reaction is, you’d have to suspect that if he’d ever read Micah before, he’d have noticed this passage and taken preventative measures.

But instead, he’s taken completely unawares – and we all know what it’s like when that happens. We call it being caught off guard, because it’s the time when you don’t guard your response. Just the opposite, you end up reacting purely on instinct, responding how you feel. Like, for example, if someone gave me a terribly ugly necktie just before the service tonight, when I wasn’t expecting a present, and then asked me straight out whether I like it. What do you do? I’ve got no prepared answer; I don’t have the luxury of sending a thankyou note where after three hours of racking my brains, I’ve been able to thank them for the tie because it matches my Hawaiian shirts. So you end up saying the first thing that comes into your head: oh my goodness, that’s awful!

Herod’s caught just like this, and his response shows his true character. He doesn’t manage the fitting response; instead, he has a little hissy fit of his own.

But here’s the thing that I noticed; yes, it’s appalling that he orders the massacre of Bethlehem’s sons to protect his throne; yes, he’s a lowlife with little imagination for trying to trick the wise men into leading him straight to Jesus; but the thing that really gets me is that he calls them secretly to find out when Jesus was born. Secretly. He doesn’t want anyone to know that his murderous orders have a reason behind them. He’d rather that they just think him bonkers.

Herod’s beyond the pale, really – he’s so far from any of us (I hope!) that we don’t pay much attention to him. He’s the nut job that you read about to feel better about yourself.

But there’s one more group in the story that we haven’t looked at. Matthew tells us that when the Magi arrived with their questions, Herod was disturbed… and, he adds, all Jerusalem with him.

The whole city heard the news. We often think of Jesus’ arrival as coming in pretty much under the radar. Small town, hidden in somebody’s backyard, only a few shepherds to spread the story. But here’s evidence that the story broke widely. The whole city of Jerusalem got wind of Jesus’ birth, and so then they…

What?

Matthew doesn’t say. But I’m guessing that the answer is they did nothing.

They kept their heads down and got on with their lives. It’s a pretty common response, I think. You know, you steer between the two extremes…those wise men, well, they’re like stalkers, aren’t they? Tracking down an infant to present him with wildly inappropriate gifts, hanging around for photos with the family…it’s all just a bit too intense…sure, it shows they’re committed, but maybe they should be committed. And on the other hand, there’s the off-the-scale opposition of King Herod. He’s not just disturbed by the news of the Christ child, he’s disturbed, period. Off his rocker.

It’s not hard to see why many are attracted to a safer middle course. Yes, we pay our respects to Jesus, but from a distance. You don’t want to get too close. What kind of welcome do we give him? No cheers and whistles, no booing either, just a polite round of applause, not too loud or too long.

But think back to the story of Theseus again. He was the son of the King, accustomed to a life of privilege and comfort. But he gave that up to stand with his people. He was prepared to sacrifice his own life, if necessary, to free his people from their bondage, to save them from repeating the same deadly sacrifice time after time. Stripped of his royal power, he took on their monstrous enemy and defeated him with his bare hands.

It’s not too far from describing what Jesus did, in taking on human flesh, being born amongst us, taking up the battle against the forces of sin and death, and beating them, that we might no longer fear death.

When Theseus returned to Athens, he became king in his father’s place. The people honoured him then, and continued to do so throughout their history. He was their saviour king, and his people loved him.

How then should we greet the birth of our saviour? We may not have seen any star in the sky, but we know him to be the star of the story. We might never get named as wise men, but we know what is wise to do. Like them, we have come tonight to worship him. Perhaps, like them, we should make a careful search for the child. For our true king has come to us, and calls us to come to him.

It’s a Bit Quiet Around Here…

2010-09-16T21:10:00.001+10:00

I’ve been planning my version of 2011, and noticed a happy conjunction of dates.

Easter occupies the last Sunday in April. Not particularly good for those looking for a holiday after term 1, but there you are.

Mothers Day, as usual, is the second Sunday in May. I’m going to persevere with making this work for inviting mums.

That leaves us with the first Sunday in May sitting at something of a loose end. How fortunate, then, that Sunday 1st of May is the day before the 400th anniversary of the publication of the KJV. I’m planning to do a sermon on something to do with the doctrine of scripture – likely its perspicuity and our wealth of opportunity to read it! ‘The Ploughman’s Son’ is the title, referencing Mr Tyndale above.

(And it makes for some kind of link to ‘The Noble Wife’ the following week, where I think Marguerite of Navarre will be my worked example of Proverbs 31. Hopefully that will save me from cliché!)

There was lots of noise for Calvin last year – but I’m not hearing so much about 2011…

Defining Evangelicalism

2010-09-10T16:21:00.001+10:00

It was asked, and a cut and paste was fairly easy.

My final year project at college examined the evangelical movement in post-WW2 English Anglicanism. I was attempting to assess whether things ‘went wrong’ and if so, how far; hence, a necessary step was to have a go at defining evangelicalism. I’ve never had a problem with self-confidence, and so after surveying all and sundry’s efforts, decided to come up with my own answer. I’m still quite happy with it, and it was really the only thing the marker liked in the whole project, so…

‘From the survey above, it is apparent that a blended approach is best, one that recognises that a definition of evangelicalism must incorporate both methodology and history in its essential features. Even given this, however, it is worth considering what controls the selection of components. The temptation to give this role to the priority of Scripture is strong, but at the very place where Stott might convince one of this, he goes deeper: ‘The hallmark of evangelicals is […] a submissive spirit, namely their a priori resolve to believe and obey whatever the Scripture may be shown to teach. They are committed to Scripture in advance, whatever it may be later found to say. […] They see this humble and obedient stance as an essential implication of Christ’s lordship over them.’[1] Beyond the commitment to Scripture is a recognition of divine sovereignty. Peter Jensen has described this as the key to a sharp definition of evangelicalism.[2] What is common to most of the attempts at definition already mentioned is their foundation in the sovereignty of God. This is literally the quintessence of Bebbington’s quadrilateral. To be even more precise, it is the sovereignty of God in the gospel: biblicism reflects God’s sovereignty in the revelation of the gospel, crucicentrism his sovereignty in its focus, and conversionism and activism in humanity’s response to the gospel. Similarly, Stott’s commitment to Bible and gospel – both tied to divine sovereignty – leads him to the Nottingham theme of obedience to Christ.[3]

Thus, if we accept that being evangelical means holding a Christian faith that responds to God’s sovereignty in the gospel, one more advantage is apparent. As the antithesis of sin, it is clear that nobody can hope to be perfectly evangelical; there must be a grey area that gives ‘room to move […] without resorting to disenfranchising one another.’[4] Evangelicals of different generations can be recognised as such, despite their different emphases, because these emphases consistently arose from their recognition of God’s authority. Different lists of evangelical essentials can be drawn up, as long as they emanate from this central point. Treating God’s sovereignty as it particularly relates to the gospel generates the evangelical method of the primacy of Scripture. And finally, the value of evangelical tradition can be weighed from this same perspective. Accordingly, the standing of the evangelical movement in the Church of England can be measured in terms of its faithfulness to this fundamental conviction.’

[The reference to Nottingham is to a gathering of evangelical Anglicans that’s usually thought to mark the point at which they strayed. I’d argue that they continued down a path already begun.]

[1] Stott, Essentials, 104.

[2] Peter F. Jensen, unpublished address, given at the 75^th Anniversary Celebration of the Sydney University Evangelical Union, 8/10/05.

[3] Stott, What is an Evangelical?, 14.

[4] Thompson, ‘Saving the Heart’, The Briefing 151: 4.

So, that’s what I meant by a high view of God’s sovereignty. I think it’s what shapes who we are.

New Horizons in Local Church Theology

2010-09-09T20:27:00.001+10:00

Sounds like an impressive book title. But no, I’m just working on next year’s preaching plans.

However, the new horizon bit is true. Our church has, in the space of the last couple of years, suddenly achieved a whole bunch of major goals that they’ve been working on for years. We now have a ‘rectory-standard dwelling’ next to the church (for us to live in, and it’s lovely), and come November, we’ll be made a ‘provisional parish’ (no longer a branch church of our neighbours up the road at Gerringong).

In other words, in the living memory of some of our members, St Peter’s has grown from a half-dozen old ladies sitting up the back to a decent-sized church with a couple of congregations, and enough resources (people, time, money, property etc) to stand on our own two feet, metaphorically speaking.

It’s been a long time coming…and so now there’s a bit of ‘now what?’ floating around. All ambitions have been achieved. The last thing we want to do is sit back and cruise – this town is enough of a retirement village already!

So…it’s time to start looking for a new horizon – new things to aim at, under God. And I’m thinking that a decent chunk of a preaching program would be a good thing to get that ball rolling.

Here’s what I’ve come up with, thus far, in a very very draft sense. Comments welcome.

Being

9 weeks, 3 lots of 3

Weeks 1-3: Church

1. Who is the church? Where is the church?

2. What is the church for? Why is the church?

3. When is the church? How is the church?

(OK, so the grammar is a bit stilted, but you can get some sense of it)

Weeks 4-6: Our Church

4. An evangelical church (not just as a theological persuasion – but saying, who we are is based on the first three weeks and how the gospel shapes a church). But I’ll use the Douglas-Bebbington quintilateral to describe things: activism, biblicism, crucicentrism, conversionism, all held together by a high view of God’s sovereignty

5. A church for the Heads – ie all of our local community. We’re the only mainline church in town, so I figure I can claim it without controversy. Church should work for people of all ages/stages etc.

6. A church for all – not just our own patch, but also seeking to be for the Shoalhaven region/mission area, to be part of our diocese/local evangelical scene, and to be part of our world (ie ‘mission’)

Weeks 7-9: Us

Less developed, but basically growing out of the D-BQ (TM) – activism implies serving each other/others; crucicentrism a willingness/expectation to suffer rather than look after our futures; conversionism a personal commitment to God and his people; biblicism a love of the Word and obedience of it; sovereignty a dependence on grace expressed in prayer and more.

The Heisenberg Unpleasantness Principle

2010-08-27T19:19:00.001+10:00

I'm doomemed. It’s Simone’s fault. Or mine, for talking too much. Somebody with so much to say is an easy victim.

So now I have to find ten things that make me happy, and in the process feel less happy about it. Frankly, I’m surprised. This is a form where you fill in your own numbers. She should have known better!

1. That God consistently deflates my ego. And doesn’t mind spending an eternity doing it.

2. Those times, once every few years, when the kids sleep through the night, and I wake up before them, having slept late. Small miracles are still miracles.

3. Thinking. I’m obsessive about it. I’m not claiming anything profound here – just that I can be having a conversation while the analytical corner of my brain is performing some kind of combinatorics exercise. Without distracting me too much.

4. Genuine time off – no chores to do, just completely discretionary time. Particularly if it’s enough to…

5. See a movie. It needn’t be fantastic, but it’s nice to inhabit a different world for a couple of hours. But the best kind are by…

6. Alfred Hitchcock. Because he’s never boring.

7. Competing. Board games, trivia, anything that requires no genuine ability below the neck.

8. The totally novel, as in never-before-in-my-life, idea that it might be possible to increase my general fitness and wellbeing while exercising, and enjoy it. Courtesy of the new bike that I bought for Father’s/birth/Christmas/anniversary Day last week. It goes really fast. Even with me on it. And not just due to the effects of gravity when falling over.

9. Cheesy pop music. Not all of it, thankfully. But a strong keyboard, or a ballad, or Bono…and I’m a goner.

10. Reading the Bible, and finding once again something new, thereby demonstrating that God is not just cool but also eternally satisfying. And far better than Hitchcock!

Not too painful, then. That means I can tag people with a clear conscience. Well, the only active readers here that I’m aware of are Byron and Rach. Though I doubt Rach will be adding to that particular blog… And I’ll tag Andrew too, seeing as Simone didn’t!

An Affair to Remember

2010-08-22T22:04:00.001+10:00

A couple of years ago, Moore College did their School of Theology on the book of Exodus. The book version is a cracker, with some wonderful and original work. This series arises from Richard Gibson’s ideas about preaching Exodus.

July 18 • Exodus 1-2

God Looked On

Even before Israel was a nation, they faced a crisis of faith: if God was watching, why was he waiting? Should a God who’s on the sidelines be sidelined?

July 25 • Exodus 3-4

Is It Not I?

Prophecy has in inauspicious birth—but there are other ominous signs of oncoming disaster. ‘For love is as strong as death…’

August 1 • Exodus 5-11

The Ruler of Egypt

‘…Many waters cannot quench love; rivers cannot wash it away…’ There can be only one ruler of Egypt, and he will rule through his minions. But what sacrifice will he demand?

August 8 • Exodus 12-13

Total Recall

God remembered his covenant with Abraham; his people were to remember this day. ‘In days to come, when your son asks you, “What does this mean?” say to him’ … what?

August 15 • Exodus 13-18

Road Trip

‘Come away, my lover…’ We follow Israel as they travel between a hard place and a rock, with God drawing them to the place where they will meet.

August 22 • Exodus 19-24

The Pre-Nup

‘Who is this coming up from the desert leaning on her lover?’ It has happened: God has brought his people to himself. The question now is whose people they will be?

August 29 • Exodus 25-40

Home Beautiful

‘…If one were to give all the wealth of his house for love, it would be utterly scorned…’ The interior decorations in this place are simply divine!

September 5 • Exodus 32-34

The Green-Eyed Master

‘…Its jealousy unyielding as the grave…’ We know that God told Moses his name—but do we know what it means?

Yep, Father’s Day for the last one. And we’re reading 1 Peter with Exodus, reaching chapter 3 just in time…

The ♥ of the Gospel

2010-08-22T21:55:00.002+10:00

I’ve preached this series before (well, planned it and shared it with a few others), and this time around I’m even less convinced of the sermon titles. But, for what it’s worth…

June 13 • Ephesians 1:1-14

Bank On It

The gospel finds its origin in the extraordinary generosity of God, and in this generosity lies a security that goes beyond the financial realm…

June 20 • Ephesians 1:15-23

Seeing Some Interest

…but God’s investment in us is ongoing; we are a term deposit that continues to grow until we reach maturity…

June 27 • Ephesians 2:1-10

From Out of Bankruptcy

…for God has paid out our debt, and we are his…

July 4 • Ephesians 2:11-22

The Merger

…and not us alone, for God is at work all over the world, building a company of richly diverse yet complementary assets…

July 11 • Ephesians 3

Whose Profit?

…until finally, the glory of God’s grand design is revealed, and we fall at his feet in praise and thanksgiving!

Well, Yes, It Was Quite Tasty

2010-05-28T15:51:00.001+10:00

Zeal for your house will consume me.

Heard it before? John 2:17, or Psalm 69:9. John takes the psalmist into a future tense though…

I think in the past I’ve been too metaphorical in how I’ve read this. Consume doesn’t actually mean ‘keep me interested’ or ‘be a priority’ or ‘occupy quite a large percentage of my attention’. It means ‘eat’.

It actually fits the context better to take it literally – in the psalm, and in John. Jesus’ concern for God’s house, for a meeting place between God and humanity, led him to the cross. On trumped up charges, of course, but they were based on what he said a mere two verses later.

He was consumed. And so the one who tabernacled amongst us became the one who was the temple, permanently.

Now, the really odd thing was how I was led to this thought by myself. Well, sort of. It was an accident. But something I wrote ten years ago (on this passage, without having understood this element properly) sent me off down the path less travelled, and it brought me out into a better place.

I can be a little slow sometimes.

Good Will Hunting

2010-05-28T15:40:00.001+10:00

Insert random mathematics textbook to justify blog post title. Done.

Raise topic. What are we trying to do with Bible studies? Done.

(make sure everyone got the joke – Matt Damon was a maths genius in the film, remember? And complex analysis could be what we do in a Bible study, or what I do in a post. Done)

Right, to the point. I was sitting in Bible study the other night, dissatisfied with being dissatisfied. I’ve always felt the weakest component of any study I lead is the application bit – where you take whatever principle you’ve extracted, and then say, so what? ‘How do we live this out in our lives?’ And discussion ensues, of course.

Being troubled about having had a great time correcting our understanding of a significant passage, and still feeling like the study had ‘failed’ for lack of obvious ethical application, my will rebelled. (Check you got the ‘will’ reference in the title. Done.)

I know it’s OK to just have a theological application…but it’s always felt like a concession to our cerebral style in this part of the world. But I wonder…is the desire to have a ‘go do this’ application wrong?

I think we like it because it puts holiness within our power. We simply need to exert our wills, and it’s done. The trouble is, I’ve never found my will very compliant. Just because I decide I should do something doesn’t mean that it happens that way thereafter.

And reflecting on it, I started to come to the conclusion that the vast majority of my growth as a Christian has actually been led by my mind, not my will. It’s only as my brain shuffles its priorities so as to get a clearer theological picture that my behaviour follows. So, for instance, my practical activity at church is driven – and I mean driven, not just subtly nudged – by my ecclesiology.

So, the question: should we in fact aim for a theological application as the default in Bible study…and raise the practical thing less often? Or am I merely justifying the thing I like?

Ah, navel gazing. Must have been a great study!

Coulds, Woulds, and Wills

2010-04-28T23:50:00.001+10:00

Richard made a nice pickup in Bible study tonight. We were looking at the cross as it reveals what’s going on in the Trinity, working our way through Matthew 26.

In the Garden, of course, Jesus prays ‘Not my will but yours’. He submits his own desire to please the Father he loves. This, we kind of expect. He’s a good Son.

But the fact that he prays it is suggestive. Could he have been more insistent and got out of the crucifixion? Would the Father have honoured such a request?

The answer comes soon afterwards. v. 53:

Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

The Son could, it seems. And the Father would. The Father would submit his own desire to please the Son he loves.

It’s a marvellous moment – when we realise that the Son is prepared to serve the Father, just as the Father is prepared to serve the Son. Not for our sake (though this is also true!), but for the sake of the other.

Either of them could pull the pin. The other would submit to it. And the world, the whole of creation, would miss its moment and be lost.

But neither did, because neither willed it. The love within the Godhead spills over into a love for that which lies outside the Godhead.

Yes, I Think I Know Why…

2010-04-28T16:39:00.001+10:00

…this book was marked down.

In the world of publishing, it’s just so important to get the right title, isn’t it?

To be followed by So That’s Why They Call Him the Lord of Hosts: Sacraments and All That Stuff. After the markdown, it won’t cost a whole lot of dough.

When the Absurd Obscures the Embarrassing

2010-04-12T13:14:00.001+10:00

In the wake of the kerfuffle over John Piper’s invitation to Rick Warren to speak at this year’s Desiring God conference, I’ve noticed that there has been some criticism of Warren’s Easter services featuring the Jonas Brothers to bring in the crowds. If you’re in doubt, here's the press release.

I’m sure it worked. But frankly, it seems bizarre. Only in America, as they say. And hopefully not often.

But here’s the thing that gets me: Tim Challies and the Pyromaniacs both mention the Easter thing…and neither of them act surprised that Saddleback’s Easter festivities seem to overlook something…just a small thing…Good Friday! No wonder Warren had no trouble preaching on Elijah for his Easter sermon – if you’re going to ignore the cross, the resurrection might as well go too…

An Open Letter to Tony Abbott

2010-03-19T22:57:00.001+11:00

Who am I kidding? Like he’s going to read this! But perhaps the email will reach him.

I attended an event today where the leader of the Opposition came at the invitation of the local Federal member ‘to personally thank’ community service organisations. And I just sent him the following…

Dear Tony

(presumably via one of your staff!)

I realise it’s unlikely that this will get to you; perhaps it will help to state up front that I expect this won’t be like most of the email you receive.

I was among the crowd at the Nowra School of Arts this afternoon, and have an observation to make about the way you spoke at the event. On the whole, you were gracious, polite, prepared to admit fault – all commendable things. However, there was also the refrain about ‘we delivered $x million dollars so you could have y facility’.

My point is this: is it not possible, just sometimes, to also talk about how money has been expended on somebody other than the audience? I realise that welfare doesn’t go over well, but still, can we not raise the debate above the usual appeal to self-interest and parochialism? If I’m looking for leadership, that’s what I’m looking for – preparedness to do something because it’s right, not because it polls well. I know you can’t look like one of those lefty Labor types (!) … but I’m sure there are still some areas where you can challenge your hearers to be glad somebody else got prioritised: the disabled, or orphaned kids, or the struggling aged poor.

I’d love to see you have a go at it, anyway! And thankyou for reading.

Wouldn’t that be nice?!

Good Housekeeping

2010-03-19T11:30:00.001+11:00

…means you keep your blog looking clean and fresh. But it’s also the title for our next sermon series on 1 Timothy…

March 28 • 1 Timothy 1:1-11

The Son He Never Had

Paul writes to his dear friend, and says the second-nicest thing he can, calling Timothy his son. But even more valuable than that…

April 2 • 1 Timothy 1:12-20

Stating the Obvious

Sometimes, the simple truth needs to be said. Even in the old old story, there’s something new to be found.

April 11 • 1 Timothy 2:1-8

A House of Prayer for All Nations

Take the Eight Verse Challenge: what on earth holds all of this together? To figure it out, you’ll need the wisdom of Solomon!

April 18 • 1 Timothy 2:8-15

Living the Quiet Life

Nothing controversial here, right?

No, seriously, we all know relations between men and women are totally straightforward.

Of course they are…

April 25 • 1 Timothy 3:1-16

Curriculum Vitae

So Timothy receives the letter from his mate Paul, and starts reading. He goes from pleased to perplexed to plain old bored. Why does Paul harp on about all this?

May 2 • 1 Timothy 4:1-10

Fighting Fit

The difference between cantankerous and courageous is …

May 16 • 1 Timothy 4:11-16

Watching Yourself

… knowing how to keep your own house in order.

May 23 • 1 Timothy 5:1-16

The Widows Might

You’re tempted to wince as you read Paul digging himself in deeper and deeper. Wasn’t chapter 2 enough?

May 30 • 1 Timothy 5:17-6:2

I Submit, Your Honour...

If all of this was being taught in your church, you’d want to have good elders too, wouldn’t you?!

June 6 • 1 Timothy 6:3-21

False Profits

Money talks, and some people listen. But the cost is too high. Where do you place your trust?

There’s a gap for Mother’s Day – we’ll do something special for that, once I remember the good idea I’ve had and already forgotten! But just because I like it, here’s the descriptor for the day:

Come brother, sister, daughter, son,
Make sure she has a day that’s fun -
So here to church your mum should come!

I’m plagiarising the metre and some of the opening line from somewhere – feel free to submit guesses. Perhaps I could offer some of my points from Byron’s blog as a reward (Byron, here’s your chance to get on your own scoreboard!)…

On Music in Church

2010-03-15T14:38:00.001+11:00

Short of telling parents how to raise their kids, music must be one of the best ways to start a squabble in church. Or cyberspace. But if I’m to be true to this blog’s proclaimed purpose, this should be here.

I’ve been prompted to think about how music is best used in church. I’ll aim at expressing how I think it’s best used in church – I have more chance of hitting that target.

So, if I’m running a music ministry for a contemporary context, I have these things in mind…

New Music vs Old Favourites

I’ve got three agendas running here, in my mind – these are comments on the songs’ newness, apart from whatever good they do by their particular lyrics/style/themes etc.

1) I like to try to have a ‘theme song’ for each sermon series. The idea is that we can use it to help us get into the right headspace for hearing whatever the theme(s) of the series is. Let me give an example: in 2008 I did a series looking at Jeremiah. Jeremiah is unremittingly miserable for almost the whole time. You can’t avoid it. But I wanted us to be able to look at a hugely significant book, rather than dodging it forever. We learned two ‘theme songs’ during the series: Blessed Be Your Name and The Voice of the Lord. The first of these acknowledges the likelihood of suffering but doesn’t go off and sulk about it – it teaches a healthy response, and this is helpful in facing up to what’s happening in Jeremiah. The second of these is about the power of God’s word – probably the key theme of Jeremiah – and looks forward to how God’s word will do all sorts of wonderful stuff in the future. Together, they meant we could engage with the theology of Jeremiah, while not losing sight of our hope.

Note that the link is to the series, rather than individual sermons (though of course I was deliberate about when we used each song) – they meant I could preach an individual sermon without having to go over the same ground each week – the songs could help me with that.

A ‘theme’ song will get used multiple times in a short space of time. A new song will get used multiple times in a short space of times. Makes sense to have a ‘theme’ song be a new song, I figure. Otherwise…

2) I’ve seen too many decent songs die from overuse. My feeling is that you need to have enough songs rotating through to get a balance between ‘we know the song and can sing it unself-consciously and therefore engage emotionally/cognitively/spiritually through it’ and ‘we sing this every second week, and I’m so familiar with it that I tune out most of the time’. My rule of thumb is that means singing a song roughly every couple of months or so – so when you do, you notice what you’re singing but aren’t distracted by it. Allowing for some ‘seasonal’ songs, that means you’re looking at a stable playlist of around 50-70 songs.

3) I also have been thinking this week about the value of novelty. Again, this is a balancing act. However, if churches basically stop doing anything new, it becomes a plague. Energy, passion, enthusiasm all die. On the other hand, if everything is always new all the time, people are constantly off kilter and unable to simply be there and do church and engage with God and each other. So I like using new songs to communicate that ‘hey, we’re not satisfied and complacent yet; church can be even better; we need to keep on changing just a little so that we’re always forced to stay focused on mission (ie reaching the lost) rather than maintenance (ie just keeping the wheels turning).’ Left to our own devices, I think we’d all prefer to get things to a place we like, and keep it there – but then autopilot goes on, and it’s all downhill from there.

Song Selection (what’s in our playlist)

I work from a playlist that has around 50 songs. I derived it basically from a combination of various sources that reflected what we were singing when we moved to this church.

Some culling was involved – there were probably a dozen or so songs that I ‘left off’ the list. Some of these were because they weren’t in regular use; some because I thought the music or lyrics weren’t the best, and we didn’t need to keep it on the list; some because I thought they had simply had their day.

So I’m working from a list of what I think we can use on a regular basis.

However, there have been occasions when someone has said ‘hey, what about this?’ and so we’ve done songs that are outside ‘the list’. That’s fine – a decent song that’s suffering from overuse can still work – because it’s so well known you could pick it up in twenty years and sing it note-perfect, so there’s no issue with bringing it out, and also because having been well-loved you can slot into using it congregationally quite well. But if that same song was coming in every 5-6 weeks, it would start to tire very quickly, and you lose it again.

There are some songs where I think the words are so bad that they just shouldn’t be sung. People may love them for various reasons; they may be able to interpret the lyrics so that what they mean when they’re singing isn’t dodgy (it might require a little verbal gymnastics, but you can do it). However, I feel bound by my role as a pastor to say that we won’t sing them, for the sake of the weaker brother/outsider/etc.

For example – there’s a newish song that’s starting to get picked up by churches all over the place. I’ve heard it a few times. The song is trying to do something commendable, but to my mind the writer has made such a total hash of the lyrics that they can mean almost anything, and unfortunately, one of the most natural readings teaches an absolutely abhorrent view of repentance. The music itself is quite good, so there’s a real danger of horrible theology working its way in via the music. I can’t think of any compelling reason why the song should be used when it has this massive drawback.

Song Selection (from week to week)

I pick five songs each week. Of these, there’d be a couple that I really want (for fit with sermon/service), and then the rest are chosen to balance things out. If a service leader or the musos need to change a song for some reason or other, there’s room for this.

Actually, the last paragraph began with an untruth. I pick five songs for each week, but I do the picking in big blocks – up to two months at a time.

The advantages of doing song selection this way, rather than just ‘what shall we have this week’, are that: you can cycle through the songs and give them all a go, rather than favouring particular ones; you can make sure that a song is used in its best week (rather than, oh, this would have been perfect, but we sang it twice in the last month already); and, as above, there’s a chance for some to-and-fro before you get to rehearsal!

As I go about picking the songs, then, I try to find the best couple of songs for a given weekend, in terms of matching the theme of the sermon/service, and then with the songs that are left over, I try to place them so we get a mix of tempos, moods, etc (so not all dirges, or not all ‘I- songs’ and no ‘we-songs’).

The disadvantage of the system is that it’s time consuming when you do the picking. I think it’s worthwhile enough to pay that price.

Songs + Sermon + Service

I’ve been a bit too imprecise in the past in how I’ve spoken in this area – I’ve tended to talk about ‘matching the sermon’, which isn’t quite saying what I mean.

Within a service, we have various elements – we hear from God (readings, sermon, for example), we respond to God (prayer, singing), we engage with each other (creed, perhaps; announcements; sharing informally before and after, etc). The idea is that overall, we aren’t skewed to any particular direction – and if you only did one of these categories, you can imagine how impoverished Sundays would be.

So when it comes to music’s part in this, I try to spread it through the different bits. We want to sing some ‘we-songs’ so that we’re encouraging each other (psalms hymns and spiritual songs!). We also want songs that are more personally addressed to God. We want songs that admit our sin, others that rejoice in salvation, others that praise God for his blessings, and so on.

What I mean is, music is really really good at engaging our emotions, and I want to make use of this for all the emotions that we should feel – both positive and negative. And I want us to be able to emotionally engage all the way through the service, so I like having the songs sprinkled throughout.

An interesting question is whether to begin a service with praise songs to get us off to a good start – not an uncommon practice around the traps. Let me preface my comment by saying what a good Anglican is supposed to say (before I go on to disagree!). Anglican services have deliberately made a habit of kicking off almost immediately with a confession. Week in, week out. The idea was it would teach the congregation that we’re sinners, and that coming before God is a huge privilege not to be taken for granted.

Obviously, this is about as far as you can get from starting out with a string of praise songs every week!

Now, I disagree with the ‘Anglican’ position, in our context, for a simple reason: we tend to only have Christians come to church. The Anglican services were written in an era when church attendance was literally compulsory, so you’d have bucketloads of unbelievers there. Confession up front made sense in that context, but ours has changed.

My preference is to be free to be flexible. For example:

Service X – the sermon is going to call us to repent. It makes sense then to open with songs that remind us of how good God has been. Then we hear the call to repent, know he has always treated us graciously, and can more readily admit our sin. Then we can sing a more downbeat song that reflects on forgiveness, for instance, then finish up the service on an up note again – hurrah for being forgiven.

Service Y – the sermon is going to provoke us to some positive action. It would make no sense to follow the sermon with a confession – that’s just saying we’re planning to change nothing. Nor do you want to go through the service without the quiet moment of confession/recognising our dependence on God, because then the sermon’s all about how we can do good works in our own strength. So in this scenario, the more reflective song might come earlier in the service.

There’s a random collection of thoughts in search of a conclusion. There’s more that could be said; I’ve really only focused on the practicalities and the theology that might lie behind them. But it’s a start!

The Collapse of Roman Catholicism?

2010-02-04T22:07:00.002+11:00

If you were expecting a serious comment here, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed. It's old news that Jesus and Madonna have a relationship. But apparently, it's all over. They've just got nothing much in common any more.

The last paragraph in that linked article, by the way, is surely a knock-down piece of evidence supporting the need to read things in context.

The ‘Ghost-Written’ Blog

2010-02-01T15:27:00.001+11:00

In the interests of preserving interest in this blog for its three readers, I thought, ‘how might I generate content without having to do too much work?’ And struck on the brilliant idea of at least posting up the sermon series that I’m working on as they go by. That way, two of my readers might see something new and worthwhile here. They might, if it’s really a compelling series, comment, and that would be exciting.

So we kick off with the first big series of 2010, appropriately enough titled

“The Ghost in the Machine: the Holy Spirit in the Christian Life”

And then I copy and paste…

January 31 • John 3:1-8

The Spirit Absconditus

We begin with the problem: how do we look at God’s Spirit, when he seems to hide from us?

February 7 • Acts 2:14-39

The Doubly Promised Spirit

Promises, promises! The Spirit had always been something promised for the future, but the wait was getting ridiculous. This had better be good…

February 14 • Luke 4:14-30

The Man of the Spirit

… and for that matter, what would it look like, to live with that promise fulfilled?

February 21 • Psalm 104

The Giving Gift: Creation

The Spirit is a gift, but he is a gift that keeps on giving. First, there is the gift of being…

February 28 • 2 Corinthians 3:7-18

The Giving Gift: Conversion

… then, the gift of truly being …

March 7 • Romans 8:1-17

The Giving Gift: Sanctification

… and finally, the gift of truly being ourselves, ourselves as we are meant to be: men and women of the Spirit.

March 14 • 2 Corinthians 12:1-11

Given for the Common Good

With our annual meeting following a combined service, this makes the perfect time to consider the gifts of the Spirit. Who are they, and why ‘what’ is wrong!

March 21 • Ezekiel 37:1-14

The Giver of Life

Who is the Spirit? He is who he has always been, the one who breathes life into us, from cradle to grave. The one who engineers our humanity. The one who makes Life. Worth. Living.

There, that was easy!

Continuing my 'Tradition'...

2009-12-26T12:55:00.003+11:00

...of filing here things that might be useful later, check out a blunt retelling of that lovely Christmas story!

A Clayton's Post

2009-11-05T23:12:00.001+11:00

It seems silly that Google can't figure out that our website should be the first hit on a search for us, but I'll do my bit to help them.

What I share in common with Obama

2009-10-10T10:43:00.001+11:00

"This is not how I expected to wake up this morning," he said. "After I received the news Malia walked in and said, 'Daddy, you won the Nobel Peace Prize, and it is Bo’s birthday.'

"And then Sasha added, 'Plus, we have a three-day weekend coming up'. It's good to have kids to keep things in perspective."

Bo is their one-year-old dog. Our Quack is one this month. And our kids regularly puncture our vanity ;-)

The Assurance of Saving

2009-06-02T14:57:00.002+10:00

Yes, saving. As opposed to salvation. Because, apparently, they are opposed.

I spent US$1.98 the other day buying some music from Sovereign Grace Ministries' resource page, and used my credit card. A$2.55, in case you're wondering.

The next time I went to use my card, the bank had put a block on it because of this suspicious transaction! It tickled my irony bone...they were unsure about a transaction with a group that are big on assurance...they wanted to save me money in case somebody unscrupulous was behind that purchase from SOV GRACE RESOURCES...

Giggle.

But seriously - that's the world's take on assurance, right there. It's measured in dollar signs.

I'm sorry, world, but are you kidding?

2009-03-19T21:53:00.002+11:00

The press tells us that Madonna is now going out with a guy called Jesus. And she's old enough to be his mother.

OK, Freudians, where do you want to start with that one?!

Just when it looked like there was a new post on this blog...

2009-03-17T10:29:00.003+11:00

Looks like I now have to work on two blogs...so to save duplication, you might want to go here for some thoughts on the ethics of eschatology-shaped evangelism.

Of Pilgrimage

2008-11-26T09:15:00.002+11:00

By way of 1) filling the yawning void that is this dustblog and 2) informing whoever possibly might be reading it, it's probably time to mention that we're moving in a couple of months, to Shoalhaven Heads. I'll be looking after the Anglican Church there...which I believe is the only church there, to save anyone getting confused. It's a branch church for Gerringong parish, still on the small side, in a town of 3000 or so.

By way of adding some useful thought content to an otherwise purely informative post, here's an idea from an essay I'm writing (or at least, should be writing) at the moment on The Pilgrim's Progress.

Very early in the book, Christian is shown a portrait of what's usually perceived as the ideal pastor - full of God's word, pleading with men to follow God, focused more on the world to come than the trappings of this one. J. I. Packer says so, and he knows more about the Puritans than me.

What's caught my eye, though, is what happens next in the story: in short, Christian receives assurance of salvation, and instantly starts pastoring those he meets. It appears to be a deliberate attempt by Bunyan to show the 'average believer' has a pastoral ministry. It's an idea that seems to have been missed by the scholars, and it's always fun to find something that the great ones have missed!

Scooping!

2008-07-23T18:50:00.001+10:00

Not the usual use of the term, but I just had to get this one posted before other notables got hold of it...

The British Library announced that Sinaiticus would be put online, progressively, starting tomorrow.

More...

The Messiah in the Details

2008-04-10T21:30:00.004+10:00

Wrote an exegetical paper yesterday on Daniel 6, and was surprised by how much I enjoyed it. Usually, I love the thinking, but hate the writing, as astute readers might have observed by now (perhaps this is a slog, not a blog).

Here's what I liked.

A conspiracy is hatched to take down one in whom no fault can be found. The only way to get him is by trapping him in his obedience to God. The secular ruler doesn't want to condemn him, but finds his hands tied. The pressure of the mob is too great. The order for execution is given, and the victim is left where his bones will rest, and a stone is placed over the entrance.

But against all hope, at dawn comes the discovery: he is not dead, but alive! Death could not take him because he was innocent...because he had trusted in his God.

Daniel, or Jesus?

"In every part of my kingdom people must fear and reverence the God of Daniel. For he is the living God, and he endures forever; his kingdom will not be destroyed, his dominion will never end. He rescues and he saves..."

And so the good news went to all peoples, nations and tongues...and so it did.

I wonder whether Daniel sang Psalm 22 for the lions to pass the time?

Ah, progress!

2008-02-22T08:33:00.003+11:00

You've gotta love technology. She promises so much, delivers so little. Yesterday's news (and calling it that seems quite appropriate) included the revelation that science has discovered a way to create a self-healing elastic band. You know the problem: you've got a perfectly good elastic band, but it breaks, and tying a knot in the ends is just too fiddly. Well, here's the solution - simply hold the broken ends together for a minute, and it's good as new.

Brilliant!

But my question is, how many of these bands will they sell in a packet? And do you get your money back when you find them all stuck together? Or do you just go to Guinness to ask about the current world record for rubber band balls?

This post was written on a machine walking Windows Vista.

Just another piece of inspired writing...

2008-01-14T19:31:00.000+11:00

Preached on Luke 7:1-17 last night - we're doing a series on people's encounters with Jesus, from Luke, this month, and was struck again by how often the Bible contains some little gem that doesn't call attention to itself, instead waiting to be discovered and treasured.

In this case, it's the identity of the two characters that drive the two pericopes. There's a soldier, and a widow...kind of like the examples that happened to come to Jesus' mind in chapter 4, as he predicted his rejection by his hometown. That's how things always go with the prophets, after all.

Which makes it just lovely that in 7:16-17, Jesus is hailed as what? A prophet! And the news spreads through Judea... and beyond!

You just gotta love Jesus - he always exceeds expectations, and in this case, he's lined up pretty good help in Luke, to make sure we get it.

'A light for revelation to the Gentiles, and for glory to your people Israel' (Luke 2:32) - Simeon got it right.

Jesus, Lord at thy birth

2007-12-25T19:09:00.000+11:00

In the tradition of all lazy bloggers, but also with an eye on finding these again easily, here is the rather timely assortment of quotations that hit my inbox this morning...

Our Lord Jesus Christ, the word of God, of his boundless love, became what we are that he might make us what he himself is. --Irenaeus of Lyons (fl. 175-195)

From Jesus began a weaving together of the divine and human nature in order that human nature, through fellowship with what is more divine, might become divine. --Origen (185-254)

Christ was not degraded by receiving a body. Rather, he deified what he put on; and, more than that, he bestowed this gift upon the race of men. --Athanasius (296-373)

That he should remain God, though born as man, does not contradict our natural hope. For the birth of a higher nature into a lower state gives us confidence that a lower nature can be born into a higher condition. --Hilary of Poitiers (300-367)

Religion does not allow us to worship the mere man: and it is not true reverence to speak of Christ as God only, separate from his manhood. For if Christ is God but did not take manhood, we are aliens from salvation. Let Him then be worshiped as God, but let it be believed that He also became man. --Cyril of Jerusalem (315-386)

If the Lord did not assume that over which death reigned, death would not have been stopped from effecting his purpose, nor would the suffering of the God-bearing flesh have become our gain. --Basil of Caesarea (329-379)

What He was, He laid aside; what He was not, He assumed. He takes upon Himself the poverty of my flesh so that I may receive the riches of His divinity. --Gregory Nazianzen (330-390)

He who exists eternally did not submit to a bodily birth because He wanted to live, but in order to recall us from death to life. --Gregory of Nyssa (335-394)

When Christ took upon him man's flesh, it follows that He took the perfection and fullness of incarnation. And so he took flesh, to bring flesh to life. --Ambrose (340-397)

He descended to become identical with us.... He made the human soul His own, thus making it victorious over sin. -- Cyril of Alexandria (376-444)

Live and Die a Pirate King?

2007-12-14T09:50:00.000+11:00

Just saw the third Pirates of the Caribbean movie the other day - yes, I have no life.

Now, with Owen going through an extended pirate phase, I'm pretty up on pirate lore and the like. It doesn't take a lot of profound thought to notice that pirates are into treasure. Lots of it, actually.

But not, it seems, in the Caribbean. There's even a joke about it in the last film, when a plot device ('the nine pieces of eight') turns out to refer to nine pieces of rubbish, rather than anything of value.

But the third film also tipped its hand toward the end, when Geoffrey Rush made reference to there being 'other ways to live forever'. I'm slow. It's obvious. All three films have had little or no concern for treasure; in fact, hardly any instances of anything vaguely resembling a fiscal transaction. But they're all about living for eternity: whether it's the cursed treasure from the first film that locks Barbosa and his crew in an undead phase, or Davy Jones' Flying Dutchman and its crew, or the ontological necessity that the Dutchman have a captain whose heart has been surgically removed for storage (though I had the impression that the reason for this changed between films 2 and 3), or finally, the 'fountain of youth' that Rush and Depp are vying for as the credits roll on the last film.

Ok, so everlasting fame and glory is part of the piracy mythos, but this is the first time I can think of that eschatology has come into it.

Interesting too, that it's transactional. To live forever, you have to pay a price: look pretty ugly by daylight; look fishy all the time; lock your heart in a box; spend a decade at sea ferrying the dead, with only one day ashore at the end of it; and so on. A fairly bleak view of eternal life, that's for sure. Indeed, the message of the films seems to be fairly hedonistic - live for the moment, as exemplified in Keira's fate.

Crime doesn't pay, after all!

The Turkey without the Turkey

2007-12-07T08:32:00.000+11:00

So the British government is debating whether Christianity is being actively discriminated against. That's the horse just cresting that mountain in the distance, and if you're wondering where the stable door is, it's just where you left it a century ago, methinks.

But what a valiant defender. The turkey without the stuffing indeed. And a utilitarian argument about right-wing parties. Can't buy Christmas cards and advent calendars. Oh dear. Next they'll ban Christmas presents! I suppose at least there's always one of those quaint old stone churches you could visit...

And the secularist! Over-represented in public life, he says. Perhaps he should form a right-wing party of his own - it's easier to get the right Christmas cards!

Harrumph. Bah humbug.

Blowing Apathy Out of the Water

2007-12-03T09:07:00.000+11:00

So it's been a while.

But I've been shaken out of my lassitude by finally succumbing to rave reviews and making the time to get started on The Doors of the Sea: Where was God in the Tsunami? by David Bentley Hart.

There's a theory that says a writer has to grab you on the first page if they want you to finish their book. When the fourth word of the book is 'verdant' you know you're reading a writer, but it was page six that hooked me good:

Considering the scope of the catastrophe, and of the agonies and sorrows it had visited on so many, we should probably have all remained silent for a while. The claim to discern some greater meaning - or, for that matter, meaninglessness - behind the contingencies of history and nature is both cruel and presumptuous at such times. Pious platitudes and words of comfort seem not only futile and banal, but almost blasphemous; metaphysical disputes come perilously close to mocking the dead. There are moments, simply said, when we probably ought not to speak. But, of course, we must speak.

I read it out to Jude when I got home, and her immediate response was to reserve the book to read herself. With three demanding kids, she's pretty choosy with her time. Now she wants The Beauty of the Infinite for Christmas!

Joy in the reading of theology; an aesthete would be pleased...

Habakkuk meets The Castle

2007-08-08T09:24:00.000+10:00

We're halfway through a integrated series of sermons and Bible studies on Habakkuk at the moment, and this week was Hab. 2. And in the last few minutes of preparing, I put my finger on what was bothering me about the chapter.

It had a few refrains and themes whirling around in it, but I wasn't having much luck in figuring out why these were the things highlighted about the Babylonians...and then the penny dropped. 2:4-20 is about the vibe, specifically, the Genesis 4-11 vibe.

We found stacks of references to Cain, Ham, and Babel - and the latter makes plenty of sense when the focus of Habakkuk is the Babylonians. There's too many to list, but for me the highlight comes toward the end of the chapter. Verse 17 again repeats the accusation of 'shedding man's blood', referencing Gen 9:6's prohibition on murder, and then verses 18-19 move on to idolatry and the making of images...just as Gen 9:6 bases the ban on murder on the fact that man is made in God's image.

It certainly makes you reassess what v. 14 means, with the earth being filled with God's glory like the waters cover the sea - a reference to the glory seen in the flood of judgment, or to the glory seen in rescue when the waters were pushed back?

And for Habakkuk, it's a good answer: sin has always been like this, says God, and that's why I tolerate the treacherous. I'm busy saving them!

Am I a completer/finisher?

2007-07-12T13:12:00.000+10:00

I've always had some doubt about this category - out of some Myers-Briggs type assessment. I just can't tell whether I fit the bill.

I'm a last-minute guy when it comes to deadlines, which hardly suggests that I have a great love of finishing things off. And then there's the whole 'what happened to June's blog posts?' kind of consistency...

But on the other hand, I finish some things obsessively. I can name a couple of too-fat books that I finished reading a number of years after I first started - Martin Gilbert's World War Two survey, and then just recently the somewhat patchy Geoffrey Blainey's 'Short History of the World'.

And now I can announce that today I completed an 11-year-held ambition, and read Billy the Punk to my firstborn son. And then I had second thoughts...what if he followed Billy's example!! Well done Jess by the way, you're still in print, and deservedly so.

Now, what shall I go procrastinate with next?

Home and Hosed

2007-05-29T13:11:00.000+10:00

I preached on the parable of the faithful and wise servant (Mt 24:45-51) on the weekend, and found the commentaries pretty pedestrian (a common fault when it comes to Matthew, I've found...). Call me pious, but I'm of the opinion that Jesus doesn't waste his breath, and so if he felt the need to say more after the parable of the thief and the householder that precedes this one, then he must have had something to say other than 'be ready' again.

So I dug around for a while, looking for something that made this a parable and not just another example or metaphor, and I think the answer's in the 'household' bit. That is, Jesus isn't just posing a question about his own disciples, he's also taking aim at the Temple leadership, prompted by the assumptions his disciples appear to display at the start of ch. 24. They look like they're being faithful because the Temple's in great physical condition...but Jesus says a faithful servant looks after the other servants, not the house.

Plus, there's also the fact that ch. 23 is a fairly serious hosing for the Jewish authorities for their failings in precisely this, and Jesus concludes with the reflection that Jerusalem's house, the temple, has been left desolate by them.

What's Taken For Granted

2007-05-22T20:05:00.000+10:00

In an effort to live up to that 'largely after the fact' bit, I'm finally getting around to something I spotted last week. This story was much like any other (well, much like the ongoing Wolfowitz saga, writ smaller, anyway), but the last few paragraphs caught my eye.

"No one is arguing about Ms Swaffield's qualifications for her positions ... but the perception in the House is that quite possibly the best applicant was not appointed." It's a bit of a Clayton's accusation of corruption, isn't it? She was qualified for the positions she was promoted to, but they're still unhappy.

Why is it, do you think, that sufficient is no longer seen as sufficient? She could do the job, but maybe somebody better could have done it too. But wait, if somebody more capable had been appointed, wouldn't that have been a waste of their greater ability anyway?

The whole idea of merit advancement was an Enlightenment-era reaction against their equivalent of jobs for the boys, the preferral of the aristocracy for anything that mattered. The rising middle classes wanted access to the plumb jobs, and thought that merit was a better means for selecting people. And hey, they had that right.

But does it really mean that you take the most overqualified person? Isn't it really meant to guard against getting a moron with good connections? I suspect that the pendulum might have been pushed too far on this score.

As for the next quote, "I treat all anonymous letters with the contempt they deserve." What makes anonymity contemptible, I wonder? A priori, that is, without any consideration of the reason for anonymity? I'd hate to have amnesia and have to write to this guy. Does he read the mail he gets from the government? His tax refund? Conversely, does he really believe the Readers Digest letters about how he's WON THE ULTIMATE whatever, simply because they have a signature printed at the bottom?

Or does he just like it as an easy cop-out for not doing his job...?

As for the idea of the same individual being in charge of the Sydney Opera House and Foxtel...

Not My Greatest Idea...

2007-05-04T15:45:00.000+10:00

...chiefly because it's not mine at all, but comes from an astute Bible study group member.

We've been working through Acts, and this week was ch. 8. It's a chapter I love for the last pericope - the way the Ethiopian eunuch finds a welcome at last in the good news of Jesus, having been shut out of everything that matters previously. He looks powerful, but knows his emptiness.

I made an observation that this is somewhat parallel to Simon Magus, earlier in the chapter - a reputed Great Power who is really an outsider, as a Samaritan, to true religion. And Isaiah 53 is a hugely appropriate starting point for a gospel presentation to someone in such a position as these two are, with its promise that the outsider can be valued by God and exalted.

I also suggested that it was no coincidence to find these two stories in a chapter that opens with a new persecution of the church: the very stories are encouraging to the church that has been recently ostracised.

But the nice idea was this: that ch. 8 leads up to Saul's conversion in the next chapter, as the chief of outsiders comes in from the cold, 'as one unnaturally born'.

Inter Mission

2007-05-04T15:29:00.000+10:00

Nothing profound today, I suspect - just a chance to raise my head above water and reflect on the week of mission we've nearly finished.

The coolest outcome has to be something that happened right at the start. We arranged letterbox advertising in the week or so leading up to the mission, and one guy turned up the week before with his son, prompted by seeing our flyer. He'd been thinking that he should look into finding a church, and there was the prompt in his letterbox. Well, it was a pretty slick flyer... And so he came back last Sunday, heard the sermon on John's prologue, and repented. On his way out, he farewelled me with a 'definitely see you next Sunday' that meant more when I read his comment card. How good is God?!

Another highlight has been the opportunity to do scripture seminars in the high schools. We had half of the year 11/12 school in a seminar on Tuesday, and it generated piles of follow up - more than a tenth of the school. Some of that is spoof responses, but even so...God is good.

It's been interesting to coordinate the mission - particularly in thinking about the impact of advertising/branding. My impression is that for many, it was when they started seeing the same fonts, slogans and colours that they started to recognise that the mission was on. Or perhaps, more accurately, that they started to have confidence in it. Momentum was negligible for most of the months leading up to mission, but has picked up markedly in the last couple of weeks. We've been well served by the mission team, which has reinforced the impression that the whole thing is worthwhile.

The tricky part now is managing follow-up, which isn't very public, and avoiding a post-mission slump around the church. Providentially, we've arranged to have a baby next month, so that might help keep people focused.

The truth will out...

2007-04-06T19:53:00.000+10:00

It's a bit of an old story, but I came across it again recently, and it's worth a rerun. It seems that Canterbury has had to face that the whole thing is crumbling - and in public, no less.

...though thinking about it, it's probably outlasted Rome (well, the Empire, anyway)...

Repenting at leisure popular

2007-04-01T00:05:00.000+10:00

I think it took 5 attempts to get a combination for this blog's address that wasn't taken already. I guess I'm not alone in indecision.

There are some high standards out there that I won't reach, so the tentative theme seemed appropriate. I'm hoping to air some of my more original thoughts here, and we'll see if anyone cares to affirm or infirm them...

To kick us off, Isaiah 40. A purple passage, of course, and there are many ugly trinkets that still haven't managed to kill off the beauty of the language. What interests me tonight, however, is my idea for reading the last few verses.

All that strength for the weary, soaring on wings like eagles etc, is very nice indeed. But what's tiring them out? It seems to be a trip that they're on - one that's long enough to involve stumbling, fainting and the like. In the context of the chapter, I suspect that Isaiah is looking ahead to the return from exile; after all, Jerusalem's sin has been paid for. Neither Webb nor Motyer seem to look this far in their commentaries, preferring to see it as reassurance for the drabness of exile.

But this then fits back in with vv. 3-11. God is coming through the wilderness, and, shepherd that he is, bringing his people with him. The highway is for both God and his people. The natural extension is that God is with his people even in exile - for the word of the LORD stands forever.

In preaching this tomorrow, the last two points on my outline - 'Coming Home' '...When Home Never Left You' - I love the power of the image of coming home, and hope to double it (deliberate reference to v. 2 there) with the realisation that home was with them all along.