Multicultural Ministry Matters

I returned from Katoomba Christian Convention's Next Gen conference a couple of days ago. At that conference, my training group looked at Malachi 4:1-6 and learned how to understand it, through Christ, as New Testament believers. This is an application of the task of Biblical Theology - understanding the whole bible as one consistent story, centred on Christ, especially his death & resurrection. Here's my notes for a biblical-theological reading of Mal 4:1-6 (Hebrew 3:19-24). Summary: Jesus brings in the Day of the Lord, in his death, and his resurrection, and his return; If we trust Christ, we don't have to fear judgement on that day, but can look forward to being vindicated; Until that day comes, we need to live Christ-like lives, patiently enduring mockery and persecution, and waiting to be vindicated when we share in Christ's resurrection. Detailed notes: John the Baptist is the Elijah who precedes the Day of the Lord. The angel tells Zechariah so (Luke 1:17)....

Legendary evangelist Billy Graham is now in his nineties, in failing health, and in need of round-the-clock professional care. But, by the looks of his Christianity Today interview, his mind is as sharp as ever, and his passion for Christ and the gospel is as bright as ever: [T]he most important issue we face today is the same the church has faced in every century: Will we reach our world for Christ? In other words, will we give priority to Christ's command to go into all the world and preach the gospel? Or will we turn increasingly inward, caught up in our own internal affairs or controversies, or simply becoming more and more comfortable with the status quo? Will we become inner-directed or outer-directed? The central issues of our time aren't economic or political or social, important as these are. The central issues of our time are moral and spiritual in nature, and our calling is to declare Christ's forgiveness and hope and transforming power to a world that does not ...

I'm off to Katoomba for KCC's Next Gen conference. I'm leading a group in strand 2 - Biblical Theology - helping them see the overview of the whole Bible, and how it develops as a consistent story from beginning to end. I was a participant back in the 1990s, when it was located at Katoomba High School, and was still called Katoomba Youth Leadership Convention (KYLC). Given that it was only fifteen days of my life (3 conferences of 5 days each), I reckon this conference has had the biggest marginal impact on my Christian life, and my approach to the Bible. Coz those fifteen days helped crystallise for me an approach to the Bible that listens closely to the Bible itself, rather than imposing our own thoughts upon it. I hope I can lead the participants into the same understanding. Prayers please.

Quick shout-out: the Christian Broadcasting Network has posted an interesting article about anti-Christian bias among media networks .

I recently had an interesting series of comments on my Facebook page re length & density of sermons. I didn't contribute to the debate, I just read my friends' arguments (so they're all still my friends...). Here's my thoughts. As responsible preachers, we must consider two potentially competing principles: Accurate communication of what the text is saying - which includes, amongst other things, clarity of language and comprehensiveness in covering the material; and The congregation's ability to take in info - which will be affected by a variety of factors, mainly outside our ability to control: their educational background, age, health, etc. A long, detailed sermon will emphasise point (1) at the expense of point (2). A short, snappy sermon, full of illustrations and application, will emphasise point (2), potentially at the expense of point (1). I don't think there's a way around this tension. Part of our role as preachers is to best work that tension i...

In our previous post , we talked about the modern problem of sexual essentialism - that is, making sexual expression essential to being human. So, if I can't have sex, I'm "asexual" and miserable and life is meaningless and I might as well die. In contrast, we asserted that real humanity comes through being Christian - being forgiven by Christ, by being in relationship with God through him. Self control is not a-sexuality - it's just controlling those urges, managing them. Self-control is an expression of our humanity - of our dignity and power. We are not slaves to our appetites; we are powerful, intelligent beings, in the image of God himself (Gen 1:26-27). We know self-control is good and healthy because Jesus did it. Jesus managed his appetites - even when the appetite, in itself, was actually a good one - when he knew that appetite was being used by the devil to try and get him to sin. In Matthew ch 4, Jesus is combating the devil in the wilderness. Verse 2: ...

Another email question I recently received was about sexual self-expression. Here's what I said. (Incidentally - I explored this same question some time back in an article on AFES WebSalt .) ***** Modern Western society is so sexualised, that sexual self-expression, and sexual satisfaction, has become essential for real life, real existence. If we can't have "good sex", we might as well die. One term for this is "sexual essentialism". To be truly human, it's essential to be sexually active and fulfilled. Otherwise, you're not truly human. In contrast, the Bible says the way to have a full life, both now and for ever, is to trust Jesus. Jesus came to give us life to the full by laying down his life for his sheep (John 10:10-11). Eternal life is to know the one true God, and Jesus Christ (John 17:3). To come to Jesus is to come to God (John 14:6). Jesus gives us more relational and personal fulfilment than the world can ever give, because he gives ...

I'm going to try an illustration this coming Sunday, to try and show how faith operates in connecting us to Jesus. I'm posting it here for comments because I want to avoid accidental heresy, or confusion. The point I'm trying to illustrate is this: The Bible says faith is not meritorious in our salvation; but it is instrumental in saving us. Faith is not meritorious . That is: faith is not a work. We don't deserve salvation because we have faith in Jesus. But faith connects us with Jesus. Unless we put our trust in Jesus, we are not actually saved. So, faith is the instrument whereby Christ's benefits flow to us. The illustration I'm trialling is: a water wheel. The power is in the water. That’s what makes the wheel go round. The pipe (the "flume") gets the water to the wheel. Without the pipe, the water wouldn't get to the wheel, and the wheel wouldn't work. But there’s no power in the pipe itself. If there’s no water in the pipe, the wheel ...

I friend of mine emailed me a question about the Trinity and our prayer life. Here's what I replied. Anyone got any feedback? ***** If I understand you correctly, you're basically asking two related questions: 1. what is the impact of the Trinity on our prayers; and 2. is the recent trend towards praying simplistically to Jesus a symptom of an unhealthy anti-intellectual anti-creedalism? Re 1: we pray to the Father, through the Son as our intercessor, in the power of the Holy Spirit. The NT pattern seems to be: * the Father has priority in planning & willing all good things; * the Son, in incarnate Jesus Christ, is the one who actually puts all the good things into effect - they are all "in Christ"; and * the Spirit actually enacts the spiritual blessings in us & for us. So, when we pray, we reflect this pattern. We pray to the Father, as our heavenly Father. We have become his children in and through Christ - by his death and resurrection for us; and by us pu...

This continues our discussion on the Knox-Robinson model of church . In my previous post I talked about fellowship and discipline. My second, more general question is: can we use the term “church” to denote the relationships we have with other Christians, even if we’re not meeting with them? I would say yes. Luke describes Paul, before his conversion, as ravaging the church (singular) by entering houses (plural) to throw people into prison (Acts 8:3). This could refer to Paul breaking into house churches - but if so, why didn't Luke use the plural, church es ? Paul himself similarly laments that he used to persecute the church (singular) of God (1 Cor. 15:9; Gal. 1:13; Php. 3:6). This at least indicates that Paul can use "church" to refer collectively to God’s people who lived in Jerusalem. Acts 9:31 refers to the church (singular) throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria - which must be synonymous with a spiritual fellowship. So, I conclude that it's Biblicall...

This continues from our previous post on the Knox-Robinson model of church . Some people criticise the Knox-Robinson model as being “Platonic”. I think it’s quite the opposite – it prioritises the physical. The traditional model is in danger of being “Platonic” because it posits a this-worldly reality which transcends the physical. Others criticise it as being based solely on the New Testament word ekklesia , which means "to gather" - hence their priority of physical assembly. That criticism is simply wrong - this ecclesiology is based on a deep understanding of the dynamic of salvation-history throughout the whole Bible. A related criticism is that the model, in focusing on ekklesia , ignores the other metaphors for church: body, temple, bride etc. These models can be subsumed under the Knox-Robinson model, the question is: what are the limits of the metaphor? When we are getting about our ordinary lives in the world, we are still Christians - thus, members of Christ's b...

The "Knox-Robinson ecclesiology" is the doctrine of church framed by the Moore College theologians David Broughton Knox and Donald Robinson . If I can summarise it without too much distortion: a church happens when people gather around Christ, through his Word. We are simultaneously gathered physically around the Bible, and spiritually, in the heavenlies, around Christ. They base this on the Biblical-theological dynamic of God gathering his people to himself: Exodus = gathering; Exile = scattering; Christ and the New Covenant = gathering again. The idiosyncratic thing about Knox-Robinson ecclesiology is the significance they put on the act of assembly, of gathering. Any gathering around the Bible – Bible study, Sunday church, major conference – is a “church”. But any time people are not gathering, they are not “churching” with regards this world, even though they are still gathered around Christ in the heavenlies. This is unusual because the word “church” has traditionall...

The gospel is about Christ’s person and work, as testified by the apostles, who are the eyewitnesses and authorised spokespeople of his person and work. The content of their testimony – their gospel – is that Christ is God, expressing his character in redemptive action. A person who entrusts him/herself to that gospel – and in that gospel, to that apostolically-proclaimed Christ, and in Christ, to God – will inevitably be motivated to spread that gospel. A church founded on that apostolic gospel will inevitably express its evangelical (gospel-founded) character in redemptive proclamation (evangelism). The apostolic gospel is autodunamis – self-powered, self-propelled. Christ engages is redemptive action; we engage in redemptive proclamation. Christ’s death and resurrection are unique events in actually reconciling people to God. Our actions of love and service are not on the same level. They express the reconciliation that we have with God and each other; they provide a “pla...

This is the end of the first decade of the 21st century – that is, of the 3rd millennium. We had high hopes for the new millennium, because it dawned with real potential for world peace. We could write the history of the 20th century as the history of three wars: WW1; WW2; and the Cold War. But the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, and the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991 – the cold war was over! Maybe we would have a century of peace & goodwill! Then there was 9/11. The 21st century opened with the War on Terror – which is still going on. We had hoped the new millennium would bring something new, something better. Instead, it’s more of the same old thing. What wars will write the history of the 21st century? Of the 3rd millennium? For some of us personally, 2011 will be very new, because we’ve finished school or university or just been married or something else life-changing. But for many of us – let’s be honest – it’s just the same old thing, isn’t it? Same old family fights & boring j...