SIN > Unmasked: Job’s troubles

The problem of Job: is suffering the result of sin?

Has there been a moment in your life where you’ve been so devastated that you just sunk to the floor on your behind and wished the earth would open up and swallow you?  I sometimes imagine it might be like that when young children watch a parent turn and walk out the door after an horrific parental break-up.  But I’m only guessing – or am I?

In 1983, the Spirit of God messaged me, “I want you to do what you know”.  In 1991, God upped the ante, and drew me to a whole other level of the ‘obedience’ I talked about in my ‘Obedience - but not as you know it’ post.   Thus followed 5 years of heavy seas spiritually; writing, editing, publishing and printing a journal of prophetic ministry for the body of Christ in Australia; sharing and teaching as the Spirit led in various church congregations; being part of a prophetic and intercessory ‘movement’ in various parts.

Across that period, there emerged another ‘movement’ that caught many up in a sometimes wild and euphoric turbulence about “the Toronto blessing”.  I had friends directly caught up in the Australian iteration of the phenomena and many were somewhat critical of my lukewarm reaction to them.  I had my reasons:

One, I couldn’t believe that God would give Australia the ‘Toronto’ blessing – as if we couldn’t possibly qualify for an Australian blessing, led by ordinary Australians (as against non-ordinary North Americans) who were already moving with the Spirit of God in, by and for Australians;

Two, I was keenly suspicious it was a so-called Right-wing political movement dressed up in religious garb – as it subsequently turned out to be, in my view;

Three, I found it both offensive and untrustworthy that the whole thing was parcelled up into seminars and workshops to which people could buy over-priced tickets in order to “catch the fire” – as if it were a contagion.

It has birthed many a Conservative political campaign and given great political clout to leaders of large borderline cultic congregations.  These congregations have huge interest in pursuing and ensuring formulaic commitments among members but teach little about the deep spiritual life of the individual believer’s unique connection to the Father.

They’re happy to insist on submission of wives to husbands and members to ‘pastors’ but baulk at pastors’ submission to apostles, prophets and teachers – or to Jesus for that matter.  In this movement, pastors are CEOs of business-model, tax-free-status organisations; and if you’re not that, you’re not “successful”.  Numbers in attendance is the critical measure of power and success.

At the same time, the movement has submerged, overtaken and consumed many a true disciple of Jesus who happens to see the world – and the ‘church’ – differently.  I was – and remain – one such.  I’m not a CEO of a large congregation of submissive followers, therefore I must be doing something wrong – ‘sinning’ in some way.

Sometime in 1996, as I was waiting on God in my ‘den’, He reminded me of a pivotal event a few years earlier.

While I was participating in the “Leaders looking to Jesus” gathering in Canberra in 1992, God uncovered a small part of Himself to me that left me shaken and with a severe headache for 24 hours after.  I was woken violently from sleep by an unearthly noise in the middle of the night.  There were 9 men in bunks in the dormitory but no one else heard the noise.  God ‘said’ to me: “I’m showing you the bottom corner of my pain”.  As I recounted at the time, the sound was a blood-curdling scream that sounded like a cross between a woman screaming blended with the noise of an F111 streaking overhead.

I responded to God: if that’s the ‘bottom corner’ of your pain, please don’t show me any more – I would die.

In 1996, I saw the pain and anguish of God again at what humans were doing, in God’s name, to His glory and reputation by packaging up spiritual life and marketing it as conferences, seminars and workshops, at which one could ‘catch the fire’.  And I saw God turn and walk out the door, turning his back on this revolting behaviour.  At that, I collapsed to the floor in abject despair and locked myself away in a ‘barn’ – for 10 years as it turned out.

For a very long time, I couldn’t stand to read the bible or listen to it; it made me sick to the stomach.  There was, however, one exception.  The one part of the bible that made sense – glorious, happy sense – was the book of Job.  Yep – you heard right: Job.

Then in 2006, the Spirit of God said to me, “There’s a little bit of morning outside.”  I reluctantly put my eyes above the sill and saw a faint glow, and as I did, a faithful intercessor friend, out of blue, contacted me to say, “you can hope again”.

And in hope, the journey continues.  I’m a very different person; the world is a very different place.  God again turned His eyes of mercy on us.  And the truth of Job had been seared into my spirit.  However, this time around, we really need to catch up to where God is at with all this.  In summary, we’re at Ezekiel 34.

Right now, there are three pivotal truths we need to grasp:

One, the great mass of ‘out-of-church-ers’ are where they need to be and where God wants them to be while He deals with recalcitrant religious and church leaders – Ezekiel 34;

Two, God is carrying out His word from the prophet Ezekiel that “I myself will shepherd my people.”  In place of dead church is living ekklesia – and those two are as different as butterflies and snakes;

Three, “bad things” happening to people in this time and state and condition (or ever, really) are NOT the result of sin as the false shepherds charge, but are an important part of the discipline and growth God is working in His people to bring them to freedom and maturity – both essential in the kingdom of God.

One of the key prophetic words of the last 20 years or so is a new rendition of Revelation 18:4: “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her sins or contract any of her plagues.  For her sins are piled up to heaven and God has remembered her iniquities.”  In this passage, “her” is Babylon; and in the prophetic zone, Babylon is the man-made tower attempting to reach God that we commonly call ‘church’.  Many of His people have heard and seen – and been “obedient to the heavenly vision”, and have, in truth, 'come out of her'.

In those ten barn years, God sustained me with the wisdom of Job and the fellowship of a circle of disciples assembling around Jesus at our big table.  This was very much our functioning ekklesia and replacement for church.

The New Testament teaches us that anyone who desires and seeks to live a Godly life will have trouble and be persecuted by the one Job was troubled by.  English bibles call this being Satan; in translation, he is the accuser.  (See 2 Timothy 3:12)

The accuser argued with God that Job only stayed faithful because God protected him; so God withdrew His protection which saw the trouble set in viciously.

Job lost pretty much everything good in his life and came close to death; all the while maintaining his trust in God.  At one point, his wife said to him, “Do you still retain your integrity?  Curse God and die!”  To which Job replied, “You speak as a foolish woman speaks,” ... “Should we accept from God only good and not adversity?”  In all this, Job did not sin in what he said, the record notes.

He got lots of advice from so-called comforters or encouragers.  (Don’t we all when things go wrong!)  They told him to stop living in denial and ‘fess up’ to the sin in his life.  (Still happens today!)  In their minds, such terrible things only happened to people who were sinning.  What’s changed?!

Job searched himself repeatedly, but could not come up with some unrighteousness in his life.

Another friend, Elihu, had a different tack.  His advice to Job centres around the sovereignty of God, not around some perceived human sin, as the best explanation for Job’s troubles.

Finally Job decides to silence his advisers, then himself.  He realises how foolish it is to try to explain God without getting that explanation from God directly, so he clamps his hand over his mouth.

At this point, God gets to speak, Job understands, his advisors are humiliated and the accuser is proved wrong ever so powerfully with Job being justified and his life and fortunes restored.

Bad things happen to good people – routinely.   And putting the blame on sin is tantamount to committing the unpardonable sin: attributing a work of God to Satan, the accuser.

As New Testament writer James notes, stresses on our faith and trust serve to make it stronger – like gym work and ‘hard yakka’ build muscle.  And this is a normal part of our disciple life with Jesus.

Jesus himself confronted the same unhelpful story when his disciples watched him heal a man who had been born blind then asked, “who sinned, this man or his parents?”   To which Jesus replied, “neither...this happened so that the works of God would be displayed in him.”

Let’s repeat that with emphasis

This happened so that the works of God would be displayed in him!

Yet still today, all around the world, people are persecuted and shunned because of bad things that happen to them on the assumption that they must have sinned or be sinning still.  Many are treated as a curse and pushed out of society.  Ezekiel 34 repeats.

As disciples of Jesus, what happens in our lives may have logical explanations, both good and bad, but it is all so that the works of God can be seen in us.

I encourage you to read Job 40.

Humankind is, at once, so clever and so stupid; smart enough to engineer mighty buildings and ships and bridges; yet so stupid as to not shut up when confronted with the infinity of God.  So ‘smart’ as to imagine that we can explain everything, yet so stupid as to imagine that God’s justice is based on man’s explanations.  Mostly because German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche declared “Gott ist tot” – God is dead.  The ‘Enlightenment’ had eliminated the possibility of the existence of God.

Sure, you reap what you sow (Galatians 6).  Many things have natural – almost mathematical – consequences.  But it is a grave error in and of itself to assume that besetting troubles are because one has sinned.  We have all sinned!  Why is it then that blessing follows some and cursing follows others?

The critical thing is to steer right away from the sin motif as explanation and follow Job: sit in sackcloth and ashes, place your hand over your mouth, and listen to the wisdom of God your lover and true father.  Let him who has ears to hear hear what the Spirit says.  Even if you are inclined to agree with Nietzsche, it’s worth suspending your unbelief for long enough to hear and see and understand – and be healed.

To me, one of the most astonishingly beautiful passages of scripture is how Job 42 begins:

Then Job replied to the LORD:

I know that You can do all things and that no plan of Yours can be thwarted.  You asked, ‘Who is this who conceals My counsel without knowledge?’  Surely I spoke of things I did not understand; things too wonderful for me to know.  You said, ‘Listen now, and I will speak.  I will question you, and you shall answer.’  My ears had heard of You, but now my eyes have seen You.  Therefore I retract my words, and I repent in dust and ashes.

Amen.

SIN > Unmasked: sneaky tricks

“It’s only wrong if you get caught.”

or

Does the end really justify the means?

In an age of relative truth, relative morals and relative ethics, what used to be the province of the criminal underworld has become mainstream, even to the extent that national leaders now act as if they believe “It’s only wrong if you get caught.”  Indeed, it seems that it is the fate of getting caught that is the ‘sin’.

Whereas it used to be a joke: “Be good.  And if you can’t be good, be careful”; it seems it is now a way of life, a mantra, an ethical code – and even a business plan.

From people spying on those spying on citizens with electronic detection devices designed not to help them stop speeding but avoid being detected speeding; to politicians separating their three domains of believing, saying and doing into silos of ‘truth’ they call upon separately and independently as the need arises – for expedience, gain or votes.

A notable feature of the news in 2019 is the repeated story of the ‘whistleblower’ – the citizen who takes a “public interest” view of wrongdoing in his/her field of employment and uncovers and exposes that wrongdoing in an attempt to end it, often out of frustration at not being able to do that via normal channels of reporting and responsibility.  If you follow the news, you will no doubt have noticed the repeated use by various authorities and employers of the cry of embarrassment when one of their own goes public on a matter they are wanting to keep from the public gaze.  The main concern does not seem to be that they were doing something wrong, but that it was exposed, causing them shame, embarrassment, reputational loss and particularly financial loss in some way or other.  ‘Commercial in confidence’ has been breached – shock; horror; prosecute; sue!

Then at times, this embarrassment is ‘spun’ in the media in such a way as to make over the wrongdoer as being a “disgruntled former employee”, as wanting to protect a third party or the public, or even accuse the whistleblower of putting others in danger by their exposé.

The case against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange is perhaps the largest and most notable of such situations where all of the elements have come into play, not the least being the claim by the US government that their exposure of wrongdoing in Afghanistan put military lives at stake.  In the process, the embarrassed/shamed party seeks to discredit the whistleblower in any way possible and seeks to embarrass him/her in a ‘return of serve’ kind of way by bringing counter-accusations against the whistleblower.

I’m not trying here to analyse any particular case or cases but rather to shine a light on the moral and ethical questions around the matter of ‘wrongdoing in high places’ and the rampant panics of obscurantism and obfuscation – the lies – that have become the cities of refuge for perpetrators who steadfastly maintain the notion that the end always justifies the means; and if it doesn’t, they can always manufacture consent for the “public interest” argument whatever that might be at the time.

It always seems to become an argument of a clash of trusts: public trust in an institution versus public trust in a treasured idea or hope or aspiration.  Expressed another way, it seems invariably to come to the matter of whittling away people’s basic freedoms allegedly in the name of being good public stewards of ‘national security’ and of protecting citizens’ safety – all without getting citizens’ prior permission to do so, assuming they have a political mandate for their actions from the last election.

An Official or an Institution does a few ‘naughty’ things that they think the public will forgive them for on the basis of a) the risk in not doing them is (allegedly) grave; and b) the loss in doing them is a little bit more surveillance and increased security measures.  It’s as if the public trust Official is told “mollify our fear and we won’t object or complain about our loss of freedom”.  We don’t seem to get that, most times, the fear is largely manufactured in order to achieve precisely this reduction of personal freedom to allow for much greater freedom for a corporate interest.  In the era of social media, traditional news media no longer have to be used to get the message out.  The old motto ‘never let the truth get in the way of a good story’ becomes a media strategy and the cornerstone of the business plans of many a media outlet.

If you factor in the theory that humankind as we know it is the result of an extended biological and cultural evolutionary process, it is incredibly easy to flick off, like a bug on one’s sleeve, the idea of God or (therefore) of His having any influence on our existence or the moral and ethical fibre of our ‘civilisation’.

I don’t.  I take the view that we are all unique creations of a sovereign God; and that central to God’s intention in creating us is that we each reflect that sovereignty.  Trapped as we might be in a straight-jacket, or cornered into a snarling mess of hubris, we are kind of “born to be wild” – to be free and sovereign beings.  The old covenant was neither designed nor  destined to achieve that, with its insistence on rules and law; but, as Paul well noted, God’s intent in that law régime was that it would point us to (and ‘deliver’ or courier us to) Jesus Christ.  Largely, humankind has chosen to stay with law – mostly because freedom seems too hard.  And it is – if we pursue it via more and more ‘law and order’ and ‘rule of law’.

In our world, what sins are being committed and by whom ceases to be an issue of importance in the light of the embarrassment, shame, loss of reputation, financial loss – real or imagined – being experienced.  Loss to the whistleblower is invariably of much lesser import and consideration, primarily because of the legislative lack of protections for citizens in general and whistleblowers specifically.  What chance does one individual citizen – waged or unwaged – have against the might (and the budgets) of the monoliths of governments, corporations and their legal strategists?

An old testament reference from earlier in this blog is once again illuminated: the prophet rages against the administration of Israel that they have made lies their refuge:

You boast, “We have entered into a covenant with death, with the realm of the dead we have made an agreement.  When an overwhelming scourge sweeps by, it cannot touch us, for we have made a lie our refuge and falsehood our hiding place.”

So this is what the Sovereign Lord says: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone for a sure foundation; the one who relies on it will never be stricken with panic.  I will make justice the measuring line and righteousness the plumb line; hail will sweep away your refuge, the lie, and water will overflow your hiding place.”

The precious cornerstone in Zion is a reference to Jesus.  God’s people – in every generation – are supposed to trust in Jesus the cornerstone; instead, they’re trusting in the manufactured lies of human government and administration.  And one lie always requires another, often greater, lie to overcome the one before it.

The ‘ultimate pragmatic’ so favoured by the US is that the end justifies the means.  I have several problems with that position, not the least being that what they think is the “end” never is the end; it’s just a watering station on the way.  To me, the means justifies (or renders credible) the end, not the other way around.

On a more local or national level in Australia, the cases of the ATO and whistleblower Richard Boyle, and Murdoch University overseas student dilemma come to mind; or the case of the St Kevin’s School students in Melbourne singing their sexist chant.  We seem to have a great deal of trouble admitting wrong – it’s s sign of weakness, they say.

‘It’s only wrong if you get caught, so make sure you don’t get caught.’  Why are we having so much trouble staying away from sin, error, wrongdoing?  The most common answer will be money, pure and simple.  “The love of money is the root of all evil.”

And the great scourge of our time as far as I am concerned is this thing we call “commercial in confidence”: we can’t be open and transparent, because that might give ‘competitors’ an advantage over us.  So, to me, the even greater scourge is this creature we call competition – when it is done for competition’s sake.  The true endgame of competition is not lower prices or better service as the myth goes, but monopoly, or, at least, a secret edge that grants an advantage, preferably permanently.  It might not be monopoly, but it is the next best thing: duopoly.  It’s not actually about honesty, truth, justice, righteousness, love, mercy, compassion, is it – honestly?!

“After all, we’re here to make a profit; we’re not a charity; nobody wins if we don’t make a profit.”  And all manner of sins are excused and become part of the business plan that is its own justification.

Now if you take that thinking just a bit further, you end up where we went in the earlier post about sodomy – true biblical sodomy.  The sin of Sodom is NOT homosexuality; it is arrogance, gluttony, greed, careless ease, disdain for poor and needy people and being haughty – the outworking of which is committing abominations, including all sorts of sexual abominations.  That’s what the biblical record shows us.  Our recent history backs that up.

We could have a world where people with any kind of ‘public trust’ (and I think that’s actually all of us) made it their business to do two things: 1) not act against another person’s interest to benefit your own interest – i.e. sin as transgression [see earlier post]; and 2) treat as a friend the one who seeks to call out our transgression in the interests of all, and of public trust and respect for the dignity and sovereignty of each of us as human beings.

In other words: stop doing the wrong thing by other people; and stop trying to punish those who just want us to stop doing the wrong thing by other people.  Practise righteousness.  Imagine a world where our competition was the first apostles’ approach: “outdo one another in showing honour [or kindness in some translations].”

We are in serious serious trouble if money is our measure of success and not honour, respect and trust towards each other.  We are on a non-stop train to the sin of Sodom.  As far as God is concerned, there is a ‘right’ way to live (and it isn’t Right as against Left); and it is right regardless of whether it is rewarded and regardless of whether those who do not so live get caught.

Conversely, there is a wrong way to live and it is wrong even if you don’t get caught.  When we break the code of honour, respect and trust, we break it for everybody – it’s not just a personal choice or decision.  Most especially, we break it for those who have built their life around not breaking it – those who opt for honour, respect and trust even when it is not returned to them.  We destroy their lives as far as their capacity to live their lifestyle choice is concerned.

Laws to rein in law-breakers have a devastating negative impact on those who do not need them.  A popular myth goes something like, ‘if you’re not doing the wrong thing, you have nothing to worry about’, but it is just that: a myth.  Law snares everybody in order to trap the few law-breakers.  We call it “rule of law” – and it stinks to high heaven.

I have some friends who once managed a 3,000 acre cattle property in Queensland.  It was, as you would expect, thoroughly fenced and the fences regularly inspected.  The family home also had a strong fence around it, demarcating ‘domestic’ from the rest.  It was generally considered ‘safe’ for domestic life to happen inside the homestead fence and progressively unsafe outside it the further one moved away from the home to the boundaries.  That’s a fine display of conservatism; and it really works well for children and for domestic workers whose job is to accommodate “domestic bliss”.  But those safety rules cannot and must not apply to those who job is to manage the cattle and attend to their wellbeing, nor those whose job it is to inspect and mend the fences, the dams, the fodder pastures, etc., etc.

Those boundaries and safety laws are worse than useless if they do not allow, permit or encourage us to learn how to go beyond them safely.  And that is precisely what conservatism – and particularly religious conservatism – does to us.  It teaches us “un-faith” (unbelief, distrust) and teaches us to sin by means of that thing I pointed to several posts back: living by sight, instead of living by trust; or living by reason, instead of living by insight, intuition and perception.

Somebody has to go and inspect and repair the fences and the dams and the fodder fields; and somebody has to mange the stock’s wellbeing and administer the whole operation – that’s the nature of a cattle (or sheep) property.  And it is likewise in this thing the New Testament calls the ekklesia – the Body of Christ.  Indeed, that is the very purpose of the various spiritual gifts.  And if mature people cannot go past the domestic boundary, the whole operation comes to a grinding halt and no one is able to “be obedient to the heavenly vision” as apostle Paul put it.  We are all accountable for our obedience to what the Holy Spirit reveals to us.  There is no excuse for disobedience because “they wouldn’t let me”.  “They” are as accountable as you and I.

But what would really work is for “They” to get out of the way – to stop taking over God’s role and allow Jesus to be the Head, the Spirit to be the guide and teacher and the Father to be – well: Father.  And, of course, for each of us to take up our place in the family.  To do otherwise equals the sin of disobedience.

Jesus and the first Apostles teach us that we are “not under law”; that there is a simple higher law – the law of love.  And for me, love is the overlap of honour, respect and trust; those who live by this law do not need ‘rule of law’ imposed on them by a state or a corporation, a legal institution, a ‘church’, or a pastor or priest.  If that’s what we’re looking for, we are joining “them” in their “adventures in missing the point”.

This does not, however, make one ‘a law unto himself’; rather it tells us that keeping the law of love is – de facto – keeping the law.

The fact that love makes a terrible business model ought not be telling us that love is futile as a way of life, but rather that business plans and models are the worst imaginable lore code, and they generally bind us to a strategy of ‘kill or be killed; ‘eat or be eaten’; ‘play or die’; ‘trample the weak – hurdle the dead’ and so on.

Sometimes it’s wrong whether you get caught or not – simply because God sees; and knows; and understands; and disciplines His children.

Next: the problem of Job (is suffering the result of sin?)

NEW BEGINNINGS 2023

I know, I know ... it's the strangest of places to start, but I'm sure you'll catch on quickly and easily.

I suspect you know what it's like when you read something and you immediately recognise it as something you've thought or said or maybe even written yourself.  Happens to me often 😊

Recently came across author Richie Norton and was reading a Google Books promotion of the Amazon download work "Resumés are Dead: and what to do about it".

I've been trying to wake up the world to this notion for around 20 years, but I might as well be preaching to crocodiles for all the interest anyone shows. So I'm glad someone else is talking about it.  Thanks Richie Norton.

I laughed with gratitude when I read the title of another of his works: "The Power of Starting Something Stupid".  And a big part of my laughter was related to the fact that I came across it while searching for quotes on 'new beginnings'.  And Richie has a good'un:

EVERY SUNSET IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESET.

EVERY SUNRISE BEGINS WITH NEW EYES

Many who know me well and have seen some of my photography will know that sunset and sunrise have been the key rhythm of my life for some years now - especially in the years of my late wife's illness and subsequent passing.  The Richie Norton quote above nailed it perfectly; I couldn't have said it better.  Best 'New Beginnings' quote I could have stumbled across - and it was the first one I found.  Thanks again Richie.

So what's it got to do with anything again???

This is the last sunset shot from the window of the home I shared with my wife until she passed in December 2020 - the rainbow was a bonus.

That was very distinctly a moment of reset.  I drastically down-sized, sold our unit, bought a tiny camper and lived in caravan parks until I decided to plant myself in a new city.  One of my favourite things to do in that period was go out and photograph sunrises and sunsets.  From then til now, new eyes meet the sunrises and each sunset is a reset.

And this is today's sunset from near my new home

A reset of sorts ... and a new beginning.  But a 'beginning' in which I take up where I left off three years ago.  If I can catch tomorrow's sunrise, I'll add it here.  But even if I don't get to photograph it, it will happen and new eyes will meet it with anticipation and apprehension; with joy and with grief; with hope and with anxiety.

So where did I leave off? My question was and still is this: where is Australia today in the will and plan of God; and in particular, where is this thing He calls ekklesia?  And where is the human creation we call "the church"?

The new beginning starts with an honest and open reading - or re-reading - of Ezekiel chapter 34.

The biggest question of all - FOR ME - is this: is it time to speak?  Or is it time to swallow the bitter pill of silence and watch on while we presume rightness and trip over ourselves yet again?

Cheers,

K

A New Beginning

The last 4 years have been for me perhaps the most difficult period of my life.  In short, I have lost my wife, sold up everything and moved to a new city to start a new life.

This post is not about seeking sympathy but about indicating here that there has been a significant hiatus in most aspects of my life - physically, psychologically, emotionally ... and of course spiritually.

My wife got an initial cancer diagnosis back in 2012. After surgery, she was theoretically 'clear' for 5½ years, but in February 2018, we received the shattering news that there were now cancer cells spread throughout her body.  She underwent all available treatments but succumbed to this hideous disease in December 2020 after a courageous battle.

42 years of living with this amazing woman ended with a crash and I was unsure if I wanted to pick up the pieces.  Because of normal public hospital waiting lists in Australia - and complicated by the covid-19 pandemic surgery cancellations - at the same time as my wife's passing, I was scheduled for major surgery.  The surgery went ahead in February 2021 and then I had 5 months of recuperation and repatriation.

By the grace of God, amazing healing took place over those months and I emerged from the fog in around July and took a 3-day trip to New South Wales to think about things.  I'm not going into detail here; it is sufficient to say I decided to pick up the pieces and start a new life away from the trauma (and the geography) of watching my wife slowly slip away.

I signed a contract to sell our unit on the Gold Coast and move to either northern New South Wales or Toowoomba in Queensland.  Just after the contract went unconditional, I fell and broke my ankle, tore the ligament and sprained the joint - all in one slip while doing the laundry.  At which point I was close to asking for the earth to swallow me up.  I was in a 'moon-boot' for 6 weeks while I sorted, culled, packed, stored, bought a caravan and moved out.

3 months of 'spring cleaning' my life by the Holy Spirit - itself an amazing and at times frightening journey - and I decided that with covid-19, New South Wales was not going to work, so I sought out a place in Toowoomba.

Through the profoundly amazing grace of God and the equally amazing love and support of my family and my friends, I am settled in my new place and really really enjoying my new life.  It takes a lot of getting used to the changes and disruptions involved in losing a spouse of 42 years and attempting to start afresh; it has not been easy.  But, in all honesty, I could not have asked for more or better than I have received: grace and help, sufficient for the need.

And today, I opened my laptop, logged on to this blog and started tapping.  The BIG question that comes to me almost every day is this:

In the years that have passed since my wife became so gravely ill; and with covid-19 pandemic sapping and snapping away at us all, what have we become as a people and as a nation; and where is Australia at NOW in the plan and wisdom of God?

Sure, there are many things in my journey of grief and loss; of healing and restoration ... but perhaps those things are co-incidental to the 'main game' of what God is doing and saying at this present time.

I have for some time now been mulling over this question of what does God think of us Aussies; and where are we at in respect of what God is doing in His world.  Is He a laissez-faire God - hands off and let it all happen without control or restraint?  Personally - I don't think so.

But the one thing I can't escape is the perpetual feeling that we are living the title of the 2006 book by Brian McLaren and Tony Campolo: Adventures in Missing the Point.  Indeed, the niggling feeling about this has been with me since 2006.

For me - at this point - it has come to a head in the present era ... an era of war and disease and pestilence and disaster:

Ezekiel 34

That's all I'm going to say at this point.  I encourage everybody to read it - in a good English translation - but to do so with a humble and open heart; and not bringing presuppositions and historical baggage to the reading of it.

P.S. By the way, over the last few years there has become available a brilliant new pair of bible translations that I have come to love alongside the  NASB.  For reading, I've taken to using the Berean Study Bible; and for studying (alongside the NASB and Tyndale) I'm using the Berean Literal Bible.

All the best for now; catch up again soon.💞

I choose ecclesia

Church as we know it in the 21^st century exists as organisation, structure and program.  Take away any one of these three and “church” as we know it largely disappears – whether we are talking about worldwide, named groups (the Roman Catholic Church for instance) or local, community based groups (“<suburb/town> Community/Bible Church” for instance).

People in charge of “churches” in the 21^st century will be looking and working to see that there are programs, there is structure and there is organisational covering or protection in order to establish and maintain legitimacy.

Organisation provides the link with history and historical movements; structure provides oversight and control within organisation; program provides definition and “job descriptions” that fit within the structure of the organisation.

And organisation, structure and program exist and function geographically, politically and commercially.  Each organisation – and its various parts – occupies a location on planet earth, however small; each has its own connection and relationship with the political structures and agendas related to its location, sometimes as an instrument of government policy and legislation; each has its own legal identity permitting and codifying all kinds of commercial activity and relationships.

“Church”, understood in these terms, is traceable historically back through time past Jesus (from whom the AD – BC time-split originates), well into Jewish antiquity, going all the way back to the Israelites’ demand for a king to rule over them instead of God and to their demand for a go-between – a mediator – for their relationship with God, in the persons of Moses and Aaron.

Today’s church is ancient Israel’s “you speak and listen to God for us, on our behalf, and we will listen to you and obey”; today’s pastors and priests are ancient Israel’s “give us a king to rule over us so we can be like the nations around us”.

⌛

But return to Jesus and his band of apostles and you cannot find organisation, structure and program existing and functioning geographically, politically and commercially in anything they did or anything they taught.  Indeed, you will find something quite different altogether.

The “church” organisation of the time committed considerable time, energy and money to hunting down, persecuting and trying to eliminate Jesus and his apostles.  And for most of the first century AD, this persecution only increased.  Most of them, like Jesus, were murdered for their beliefs, teachings and practices even though the most notable characteristic of their lives was love.  The great apostle Paul was for a time one of the murderous persecutors until he was confronted by the resurrected Jesus.

The “church”, since Jesus, has unceasingly claimed to be the only valid inheritor of the things the New Testament describes as belonging to the new covenant people of God.  And it has done so precisely because it IS NOT the valid inheritor.  Look at the things Jesus said about and to the “church” leaders of his day (the Scribes and Pharisees); examine how relentlessly they pursued Jesus until they succeeded in crucifying him; look at how they relentlessly pursued and persecuted Paul (who used to be one of them) and tried to subvert every single thing he did in his obedience to Jesus’ commission to spread abroad the good news of his kingdom; look at how successful they were by the end of the second century AD at corrupting the message and the messengers and imposing their organisation, structure and program geographically, politically and commercially.

The “church” IS NOT the inheritor of Jesus and the apostles; it is the great interloper and the great pretender, claiming things for itself that it has no right to and then, over the centuries, propagandizing the world to its point of view.

There is an inheritor of Jesus; and the apostles, and Jesus himself – along with Paul – were quite clear about it.  Never in that first hundred years did it take the term “church” to apply to itself.  Indeed, it fully and well understood that the term “church” specifically DID NOT apply to it; it applied to Israel and its organisation, structure and program: the house of the Lord and the people culturally attached to that.

The true inheritor of Jesus and the apostles is the “ecclesia” of God, not the “church”.  And those throughout the centuries who have insisted that “ecclesia” translates to “church” have, knowingly or unknowingly, conspired with the interlopers and persecutors to obscure the truth – to obfuscate – in this entire matter.  This is what the great bible translator William Tyndale was murdered for!

The “church” is not the “ecclesia” currently sick and dying from its own corruption and putrification.  It is an imposter; an interloper; a doppelganger.  The “church” is Jesus still dead and buried and decomposing in the tomb; the “ecclesia” is Jesus resurrected – raised to new life.  Sure, “ecclesia” does have (if Paul is to be believed) some spots and blemishes and wrinkles, which are being healed by the on-going work of the Spirit of God.  But who would call the false teaching, the false prophets, the false shepherds, the commercial and legal connivings, the real estate deals done, the millions of lives snuffed out in God’s name, etc., etc., etc. – who would call these things spots blemishes and wrinkles?  Deceivers and doppelgangers!

The “ecclesia” is not an organisation nor any combination of organisations; it is a living organism – indeed, a fully formed and functioning body.  It’s ‘structure’, if one can call it that, is entirely spiritual: ‘living stones’ being built by the Spirit of God into a living temple – the new dwelling-place of God on earth.  And its ‘structure’ has at its heart a five-fold ministry of elders equipping the entire body so that it grows up and into the maturity of Jesus.  And its ‘program’ is each member of the body functioning according to its Spirit-given gifts.

It is geographically located wherever at least two or three are gathered in the name of Jesus; it is politically unaligned and non-partisan because its citizenship is in the Kingdom of God, not in any kingdom of man; it is non-commercial and non-legal as far as this world is concerned because its currency cannot buy worldly goods neither can the world’s currency buy Kingdom goods; and because it operates by grace and trust, not by law.

The “ecclesia” – let me say it again – is a living being, not an organisation.  Consequently, its structure and program is of an entirely other order and cannot adequately be described using terms that apply to organisations that are located geographically, politically and commercially.  One can contrast the two, but not really compare them.

Now, along similar lines, think of “Ministry”.  In like manner, “church ministry” can be traced historically all the way back to the organisation, structure and program of Israel when they refused the Kingship of God and a personal and intimate relationship with Him, choosing instead to have frail men as mediators.

And, like with “church”, the ministry of Jesus and the apostles was profoundly different from (and at times opposed to) the “church ministry” of the day.  For instance, “church ministry” forbids contact with lepers and prostitutes and other undesirables, while the ministry of Jesus and the apostles was directed specifically towards them;  “church ministry” is for the chosen, the elect, the ‘insiders’ whereas Jesus provoked “church” by choosing ‘outsiders’.

In the new covenant, there is one mediator between God and man – the Man Christ Jesus.  Ministry then is as ‘other’ or different as “church” and “ecclesia” are.  Ministry in “church” is work performed within a geographically, politically and commercially located organisation with structure and programs.  Ministry in “ecclesia” is worship of God by Spirit-gifted, born-again people serving one another in clusters of at least two or three, being guided, fed and supported by a circle of elders together discerning the mind of Christ and executing that commission.  Jesus’ commission to his disciples was entirely outward looking; but his commission to elders was to ‘shepherd the flock’; to feed his sheep.

From time to time it may happen that ministry in “church” coincides with ministry in “ecclesia”, but they are still very different things and should not be confused.

What does church look like?  Well church will always look like church and church will always be organisation, structure and program located geographically, politically and commercially.  And it will always be of another order altogether from what Jesus and the apostles sought to establish in the first 70 years after Jesus’ birth.  And time, energy and money spent here is largely wasted.  Sound familiar?

What does ministry look like?  Well church ministry will always look like church ministry as we have seen it from ancient Israel to 21^st century religious organisations, with only subtle changes over time and across cultures.

But the question of real import is what does ecclesia look like?  I have dealt with that question in detail elsewhere.  But it looks nothing like church.

And the following question is, what does ecclesia ministry look like?  Like Acts and the New Testament epistles.

And if there is a historic line of connection from the past to present ecclesia ministry, I suggest it is what the bible refers to as “the remnant”.  There will always be a remnant of faithful people who will not bow the knee to “Baal” or any other interloper or doppelganger.

I choose Ecclesia!

10 Distinguishing Features of Ecclesia

10 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF NEW POWER: Values

From my reading of New Power, I have collected what I think are the “top ten” distinguishing features of new power.  Essentially these are value statements.

However, before looking at the detail, I want to illustrate something that I believe lies behind these features/values – a ‘how come’ and a ‘what for’ regarding the values.

If you want to build a house and you place an order, what will be delivered?

In Old Power, this is what you’ll get ...

In New Power, this is what you’ll get ...













Distinguishing features:

1.      New power is age-blind

2.      Human beings are innately sovereign

3.      Therefore: self-efficacy; self-advocacy; self-help

4.      Informal, networked approaches to governance and decision making

5.      A special emphasis on collaboration and co-operation

6.      Radical transparency

7.      Quick to join or share; reluctant to swear allegiance

8.      The more light we shine, the better

9.      The power of the crowd

10.  People are 5-dimensional

10 DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF NEW POWER: “church”

From an application of new power values to an iteration or instance of “church” (noting that I distinguish sharply between old covenant (church) and new covenant (ecclesia), I see direct equivalents in the New Testament to these distinguishing features.

However, before looking at the detail, I want to illustrate something that I believe lies behind these features/values – a ‘how come’ and a ‘what for’ regarding the values.

If you want to build a ‘church’ and you set to work, what will be delivered?

 In Old Power (old covenant/church), this is what you’ll get ... (or one of a variety of equivalents)

In New Power (new covenant/ecclesia), this is what you’ll get ...

Distinguishing features:

1. New power is age-blind: “no distinction” whatsoever
2. Human beings are innately sovereign: ceded to Jesus
3. Therefore: self-efficacy; self-advocacy; self-help: “each one has...”
4. Informal, networked approaches to governance and decision making: “It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us.”
5. A special emphasis on collaboration and co-operation: “all must be done...”
6. Radical transparency: see Paul 2 Corinthians 1
7. Quick to join or share; reluctant to swear allegiance: “swear not all” and “committed to one another”
8. The more light we shine, the better: “Let your light so shine before men...”
9. The power of the crowd: see Acts 2
10. People are 5-dimensional: fully human plus the power of the Holy Spirit

When bad things happen to good people

Whoa!  What's this about bad things and good people - and good things and bad people!

Who would deny that “bad things happen to good people”? 

But are we prepared to drop our presuppositions and think again?

“Good” people – who determines that?  Doesn’t it automatically imply that there are “not-good” people or “bad” people?  Who measures that?

There are multiple pre-suppositions – assumptions might be the better word – right there; arguably the most import of which is “I’m not a bad person” – a protest we regularly hear when catastrophes or accidents happen.

What’s the measure of a good person?  And is a bad person just a person who doesn’t pass our ‘good’ test?  Is there an external perspective – something or someone with the authority to measure us all?  If we have a ‘good’ test, what’s in it?  Is a ‘good’ test a bit like the IQ tests – you know: the ones that are so culturally determined that 60% of the world cannot but fail?  If the test is based on a moral code of some sort, which moral code?  And is one better or more authoritative than the other.

But here we are – living as if none of those questions matters; because it’s far easier to just make up rules than ensure we pass the test but others may not.  Then we judge them for not being as good as we are – more specifically, as I am.

“Bad” things – who determines if a thing is bad or not?  What is bad in one part of the world is not bad elsewhere: is that because ‘they’re’ not as advanced or developed or educated as we perceive ourselves to be?  Is there a universal set of morals that does – or can – apply to everybody; if they’ll just submit to that standard (our standard)?

What is the measure of a bad thing?  Is it bad in and of itself or is it bad because it affects things and people badly?  And if we’re just another animal on the planet, are we not just another ‘thing’ to be badly affected – or not?  Is the measure of a bad thing ours to determine or is there some external, abstract standard etc etc etc.

Stop it – my brain hurts already!

Well, if we believe in any kind of accountability (divine or otherwise) or karma or ‘universal justice’, we have no choice but to abandon our guns and grenades and weapons and stop waging war on others.

If I am a free sovereign individual, then so is the person whose eyes I’m looking into.  And if I’m not a free sovereign individual, then I’m just a ‘thing’ that other things happen to and I have no business interfering in other thing’s crap.

I’m fairly certain that COVID-19 organisms are not minding the welfare of each other by telling them in no uncertain terms when they’re wrong or not reproducing or mutating properly – or improperly for that matter.

And for those who are sometime theists and users of the bible, that very bible makes it plain that “when bad things happen to good people” (the title of a book you can find in the stores), IT IS NOT BECAUSE THEY HAVE DONE SOMETHING WRONG – not even in the Old Testament under the old covenant.

It’s either random or it’s not.  If it’s random, we have nought to judge about; and if it’s not random, we still have nought to judge about because that same bible specifically teaches us that God is in control of it all; God has his reasons that we, because of our lack of trust, fail to get or even comprehend often; and we are specifically instructed to not judge.  And the reasons given as to why we are not to judge are a) because we are all in the same boat; and b) we all have a speck or a log in our eye.  “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.”

So when we cavort about, pointing the finger, we are assuming that we are better than the one we’re pointing the finger at – and, no matter how much we twist the bible, that is simply not true.  “Let each esteem the other as better than himself” and all.  And then perhaps we could add a bit from the Old Testament.  Prophet Isaiah said:

“Then you will call, and the LORD will answer; you will cry out, and He will say, ‘Here I am.’ If you remove the yoke from your midst, the pointing of the finger and malicious talk, and if you give yourself to the hungry and satisfy the afflicted soul, then your light will go forth in the darkness, and your night will be like noonday.”

And what does Isaiah’s “then” refer to?  God told Isaiah to tell His people this – loudly:

While we’re – with profound hubris – shouting madly about what “the bible says” and what “the world” should do, God is trying to get our attention with a message very much like this, but we’re happily ensconced in our own little world not even aware that the very bible we like to thump our pulpits with is pointing the finger right at us – right now!

A glance to the side might be in order – and take a look at British alternative rock band Jesus Jones.  Here’s a few lines from their “Watching the world wake up from history” song.

Here on youtube: https://youtu.be/MznHdJReoeo




Them’s my words! – they just got to them first.

I was alive and I waited, waited, waited (my Master’s thesis was about waiting for the bus that never comes.  But right here right now?  There’s no other place I want to be – because we’re watching the world wake up from history – and I don’t want to miss a thing.  I saw in that decade where it seemed the world could change, in the blink of an eye.  But that became just a monument and now stands as a sign of the times – pointing to a grand missed opportunity.

Francis Fukuyama some time ago declared “the end of history”.  Now we know with absolute certainty he was wrong.  Just how wrong we’ll have to wait and see.  Will we “snap back”; or will we experience The End of Stupor (Ronald Conway, 1984)?  Either way, there is a new history to be written.

The question remains: will it be written by people with “Eyes Wide Shut” and their heads stuck in a big blue barrel – or by people who know with absolute certainty that there is such a thing as society it’s US.