AA

Posted on April 27, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

AA. These two letters, placed side by side, are a common sight today. They stand for a battery and bra size. It could be used to refer to the Australian Army or to an Anti-Aircraft battery. Its most familiar forms are probably: American Airborne and Alcoholics Anonymous.

Here, I would like to create a new acronym using these two letters – Arrogant America!

On the 11th of September, 2001, America and the world were reshaped by an act of terrorism. In the wake of that attack, the patriotic rhetoric followed. It was not the flow of a gentle stream. It was the torrent of a mountain gorge after heavy rain in the mountains above.

One may expect a degree of patriotism after such a devastating event. One would even say that some patriotic statements would be a natural psychological reaction to such a catastrophe. However, to this day, I am still puzzled by the degree of the rhetoric. What is more, I am absolutely bewildered by the lack of humility that was displayed.

That lack of humility caused me to pen the following:

What are these deep questions? Let us start with, ‘Why does not “God bless America?”’[1] ‘Why does America believe that she has something to offer the world when she is in turmoil?’ ‘Why does America state a belief in God and then ban His teaching from schools?’ ‘How does the President talk of “Justice” when the court system rarely delivers anything resembling justice?’ Last of all, Why does this nation exclaim, God Bless America! and then humiliate preachers of the Gospel whilst exalting Islam?

This leads us to the prayer mentioned earlier.

The prayer in question is used because it exemplified many of the themes found in other prayers. It was delivered by a female politician.[2] As she stood at the microphone delivering her invective, a picture formed in our mind. There stood this woman in front of a maddening crowd. The crowd was in a frenzy and they were being whipped up even further. How was this done? This woman had done the miraculous. She had captured the nation’s god. She held it out to the people. She demanded of this god that it act to do the will of the people. To excite the crowd further, she placed one hand on the back of the god’s neck and forced it to adopt a posture of submission. With her other hand she twisted the god’s arm behind its back. She forced it further and further. With each flinch made by this god, she made more demands. This god was to bless the nation. It was to mandate revenge against the evildoers, but it was to be blind to the transgressions of the nation. If this god would but do this, it would be allowed to remain as the nation’s deity. In the ensuing battle and victory, all the glory would belong to the nation. If they failed, they would once more capture this god and punish it for its second delinquency. After all, should not this god have protected the righteous from the outpouring of the infidel’s wrath?

When this woman spoke, nay, foamed at the mouth, she did not exhibit grace. There was not an ounce of contrition. One looked in vain for humility. She did not for one moment countenance the idea that this event may have been a judgement upon her nation, a wakeup call or a call to repentance. In short, this was not a person placing themselves before almighty God in a humble prayer. This was not the prayer of the faithful seeking wisdom of the Almighty. It was not the prayer of one who sought justice for the righteous at the hand of God. Rather, it was akin to a letter of final demand.

This prayer sounded very familiar. We remember reading something like it in an old book. We searched and found this ancient prayer. The similarities were striking. This ancient prayer was offered by a public official in a time of national crisis. However, there was an even greater similarity, namely, the attitude involved in offering the prayer. As we read this old book, we were also struck by the commentator’s appraisal of the prayer. It makes for interesting reading. The following is an excerpt from the book:

And He [Jesus] also told this parable to certain ones who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: “Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee, and the other a taxgatherer. “The Pharisee [public official] stood and was praying thus to himself, ‘God, I thank Thee that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this taxgatherer. ‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ “But the taxgatherer, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ “I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself shall be humbled, but he who humbles himself shall be exalted.”[3]

… This woman, as with the Pharisee, prayed to herself. She may have used the jargon of her culture’s religion, but she was not praying to the God of the Bible. As she prayed she brought herself under Jesus’ denunciation. She thought more highly of herself than she ought. She was not willing to pray, ‘Father (intimate and relational) thy will be done (humble submission) and grant wisdom that justice may be done in the earth.’ No. We heard, God (impersonal and aloof) we are going to find the people responsible and exact revenge (subversive). She “trusted in herself.” She trusted in the State. She was one who needed not a physician. Which raises the question, ‘Why did this woman even bother to call the doctor?’[4]

So, “Why revisit the past?” you ask. Simple. America is “thicker” than the proverbial plank![5] They have not learned the lesson so terribly taught to them over a decade ago.

Recently, two brothers set bombs at the Boston Marathon. These bombs killed three. What was America’s response? Once more the torrent of patriotism flowed. Once more pride, ego, bombast, and arrogance were the order of the day.

Only a day or two ago, I saw both the President and Vice-President giving speeches. There was nothing of humility and certainly nothing to do with Almighty God.[6]

Once more there was simply a hollow, patriotic rhetoric echoing a belief that America was, of itself, invincible. Note these words from Vice-President Joe Biden:

“Why this terrorist phenomenon the beginning of the 21st century, why? People say to me for they surely know they can never defeat us. They can never overthrow us. They can never occupy us. So why? Why? Whether it’s al Qaeda Central, or two twisted, perverted, cowardly knock-off jihadists here in Boston. Why do they do what they do?”

…“I’ve thought about it a lot, because I deal with it a lot, and I’ve come to the conclusion, it is not unique to me, but they do it to instill fear, to have us, in the name of our safety and security, jettison what we value the most, and what the world most values about us, our open society, our system of justice that guarantees freedom, the access of all Americans to opportunity, the free flow of information and people across this country, our transparency.”

“It infuriates them that we refuse to bend, refuse to change, refuse to yield to fear,” Biden said. “The doctrine of hate and oppression, they’ve found out, cannot compete with the values of openness and inclusiveness. And that’s why they’re losing around the world. The irony is we read about these events, we experience them. But the truth is, on every frontier, terrorism as a weapon is losing. It is not gaining adherents. And what galls them the most is that America does remain that shining city on the hill. We’re a symbol of the hopes and dreams of the very aspirations of people all around the world, people who live where they thrive. Our very existence makes a lie of their perverted ideology.”[7]

There is a lot in those statements. Let us, then, start our critique with the last highlighted comment – a shining city on a hill. This comment is really the salient point. America’s founders, being Christians, spoke of the new nation as a city on a hill. Thus, the term came to have particular relevance to Boston.

This reference from Matthew has to do with Christ’s disciples being the salt and light of the world.[8] Consequently, when the term “a city on a hill” is used, the shining has to do with the righteousness of Jesus Christ, not the indomitable spirit of Humanism. The shining is the “Light of life” that came into “the darkness”[9] and not darkness masquerading as light.[10]

Therefore, implicit in this terminology is the fact that the shining is the righteousness of Jesus Christ based on the fact that He is the exact representation of God in whom the fullness of the deity dwells. In short, the shining is capitulation and submission to the Law-Word of God. We shine only when we are obedient to all that the Father has commanded.

Therefore, Mr. Biden is naught but a deluded fool when he speaks of the magnificence of America in the terms that he does. For speaking thusly, he is not speaking of Christ and obedience to God, but of Humanism and the pride of man. This leads us to ask, What justice? What freedom? What openness? What transparency?

We are speaking of a country that practices open genocide. America has murdered millions of unborn children in the womb since 1973 and called it choice. I tell you that Saddam Hussein at his worst did not come close. We are speaking of a country where law enforcement can add the word ‘terrorism’ to a charge and you simply disappear; no judge, no lawyer, and no jury.

We are speaking of a country whose current President’s right to hold office has been constantly challenged because his birth certificate has been sealed. Sums of money have been offered to induce him to come forward and produce his birth certificate. Thus far, nothing. Transparency! This is not transparency. This is somewhere between opaque and “particulate soil in a colloidal suspension” – mud!

Then, when he speaks of “our open society”, this deluded man speaks not a freedom and truth, but of the acceptance of perversion. He speaks of letting homosexuals from the closet. He lauds the rights of those who kill children in the womb. He stands in awe of the euthanasic doctor who destroys the old and infirmed. He loves “openness” in so far as family and society are laid open to government infiltration and control for the exacting of unjust taxes and false government. What he will not tolerate, however, is the preacher of righteousness who speaks truth in God’s name. Then the “open society” closes ranks in order to silence, denigrate, and obliterate God’s name.[11]

America may still speak of God with a capital “G”, but the truth is that they, organisationally as a nation, have abandoned this God and his standards. You can add the words” God Bless America!” to the end of as many speeches as you like, but it will not bring God’s blessing.

When the heart chases darkness; when the heart wilfully rebels; when the heart is openly deceitful; taking the words “God Bless America” to your lips is treasonous and leaves one ripe for judgement. It is to acknowledge the God of the Bible. It is to acknowledge that He has revealed His standard. Yet, it is to belittle God by believing that you can deceive Him.[12] It is to ask God to be an absolute hypocrite. Yes, that is right. Americans are asking God to be a hypocrite. They expect God to protect them from evil doers, when they in fact commit more evil than their enemies!

This is the crux of the problem. America wants to be the “light on the hill”. However, they fail to appreciate two absolute truths regarding the light.

First, the light is righteousness. It is not freedom. It is not democracy. It is not the constitution. It is not the creating of a legal environment in which “every man can do right in his own eyes.” It is righteousness and righteousness alone. Righteousness is rightness before God. Rightness before God is obedience to God. Obedience to God is Jesus Christ and those who are in Jesus Christ. Therefore, the radiance of the light emanating from that hill must be Jesus Christ and all that His glorious name entails.

Second, America has a perverted view of how that light is to work. If I put a powerful light on the roof of my house, must it not of necessity illumine my house and my yard before it reaches to those of my neighbour? Americans walk around draped in cloaks with large hoods. These they use to hide themselves from the light, comforted by the fact that they do not need any such light. They shield themselves, yet hope that, as the light leaves their shores, it would gather intensity and help those to who it comes.[13]

Two fallacies. One, a light that is not Christ is no light. Two, the light must fall upon and illumine those closest before it can fall upon and change those far away.

America may have started out as a light on a hill. It may have shone brightly as it sought to obey God in Christ. However, as the Christian heritage has been jettisoned bit by bit, so has the true light. The Humanists could see the light diming and people began to ask questions. The humanists, being clever and deceptive, lulled you to sleep. Then, while you were sleeping, some humanists trotted to the top of the hill and switched globes.

The consequence is that you still see a great light. You think it is the same one your forefathers erected, but it is not. It is dressed up the same. It is described using the same language. Yet, you know it is not because the new light is cold and harsh, not warm and gentle. Those old enough to have witnessed the true light will testify that it was warm and gentle. It gave guidance in dark places. It was alive. It would take the lost by the hand and lead them to safety. Not so this new light. Its harsh light blinds. It beguiles. It does not warm and lead. It blinds and makes all to think that they are upon a safe path, when in fact they skirt a precipice.

America’s national anthem shows the old light. Its last verse says:

O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand; Between their loved home and the war’s desolation. Blest with vict’ry and peace, may the Heav’n rescued land.
Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation! Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just, And this be our motto: “In God is our trust.”
And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave![14]

These words, rightly understood made America the land of the free and the home of the brave. It did make America a light precisely because their trust was in Almighty God. Today, this is no longer the case. They use “God” words that are hollow. They are left over from a bygone era. They have form, but they have no substance. All these words are, is a provocation in the ears of God.

How many wakeup calls must America receive? How long will she pretend?

America may be the land of the free (laughable) and the home of the brave (undoubtedly). However, she is also the home of the stupid and the arrogant. She is this because she has wholeheartedly turned her back on the living God and has turned aside to idols of her own making. This sin is bad enough in itself, but she multiplies her guilt by pretending to still serve God Almighty.

Such a provocation can only result in a manifestation of God’s judgement. This is seen every day. Shootings, murders, governmental disintegration, racial tension, violence, familial disintegration, governmental policies of nihilism, ineffective government, high taxation for no result, debt, not to mention 9/11 and Boston.

America the Arrogant; how she needs the humility of Christ! She has become like the ancient city of Babylon – strong, great – yet the heavenly voice cries out, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! And she has become a dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hateful bird.”[15]

This is the end of every nation that comes to believe that it is invincible apart from God. They abandon God. They delve into sin. They become abhorrent in the sight of God and God casts them down.

Is this not the pattern shown to us in Scripture? The Amorite. Israel. Judah. Assyria. Babylon. Egypt. America will not escape unless she repents.

America the Arrogant! Repent of your falsehood and your evil deeds. Repent and return to Jesus Christ, the fair and beautiful light you once new. Put away your arrogance and clothe yourself in the humility of Jesus Christ and, once more, be a light on a hill.

Australia, repent and do likewise, for we too are a stench in the nostrils of God.

[1] We do not have room to expand on this point. Suffice to say that the Biblical concept of God’s blessing is very much associated with peace. It strongly infers rest from all of one’s enemies. Strife, internal, external or both, would suggest a lack of blessing. Here, in summary, we simply posit the end of all things. God’s blessing upon His people is peace. No tears, no sickness, no evildoers. The swords will be turned into ploughshares. These themes can be found in any of the covenant documents.

[2] Please forgive the lack of specifics. As I sat watching this event unfold I began making mental notes. Unfortunately, what I should have done is tape it or use pen and paper to record specifics.

[3] Luke 18:9-14. The New American Standard Bible, (La Habra, California: The Lockman Foundation) 1977. All Scripture quotations are from this source unless otherwise noted. Emphasis added.

[4] Twin Towers: Symbol of Hypocrisy; Part 2 The Walls Came Tumbling Down.Available at: http://www.reformationministries.com.au/sfarticles/TwinTowers2February2002.pdf.

[5] The Biblical terminology is hard-hearted and stiff-necked.

[6] If anything was clearly apparent during this event it was the lack of reference to God. Maybe 9/11 pushed America into a more self-aware state of paganism. As natural crises in the past have caused people to abandon a superficial faith, so 9/11 may have (I would say, has had) this effect upon the United States.

[7] Viewed at: http://www.mediaite.com/online/joe-biden-calls-boston-bombing-suspects-two-twisted-perverted-cowardly-knock-off-jihadists/ ; 27/04/13. Bold added.

[8] See Dispelling Darkness for a commentary on our nature as light bearers. Available at: https://www.reformationministries.com.au/blog/2013/04/dispelling-darkness/.

[9] John 1:1-5.

[10] 2 Corinthians 11:14; 2 Timothy 3:5.

[11] Space simply does not allow for a list of things that contravene God’s law. Humility needs to be shown by us Aussies because our leaders, whilst not as blatant, are tarred with exactly the same spirit of godlessness.

[12] Psalm 94:8-11: “Pay heed, you senseless among the people; and when will you understand, stupid ones? He who planted the ear, does He not hear? He who formed the eye, does He not see? He who chastens the nations, will He not rebuke, Even He who teaches man knowledge? The Lord knows the thoughts of man, that they are a mere breath.”

[13] Jesus had something to say about a “speck” and a “log”, which would seem appropriate at this point. Matthew 7:3-5.

[14] Taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Star-Spangled_Banner. Please note the use of capitals. ‘Heaven’ and ‘power’ are both capitalised signifying that they are references to God Almighty. There is even a reference to salvation in that the “land” is rescued by God. It is in this knowledge that the forefathers could say, “In God is our trust.” They believed God. They believed His word. They believed His Christ. Thus, they had confidence to seek God’s blessing as a reward for their obedience. Equally, they could expect victory when they fought for the “just” cause. This was not a carte blanche view. It was a Biblical and covenantal view.

[15] Revelation 18:2.

Dispelling Darkness

Posted on April 25, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

Don’t you just hate curly questions? You know the ones to which I refer. They put you on the spot. They make you feel uneasy. Your brain scrambles with the constant egoistical message, “C’mon dude! You’re a smart man. You can answer this!” Yet all that flashes before your eyes is something akin to that wretched web error: “Http 404 page not available!” In an instant, I am once more back at school and standing in the corner.

As perplexing and humbling as the “curly” question is, sometimes it has a great benefit. If we will lay our egos aside for just a moment, we will realise that the curly question may be a blessing in disguise. If we are willing, the curly question becomes to us Alice’s rabbit hole or the Pevensie’s wardrobe – it becomes a portal to a journey of discovery!

One such curly question came to my attention via a visiting missionary. He related how he had once been asked by a tribesman, “Where does the darkness go when the light is turned on?” I can imagine the surprise the missionary felt. Here you are to teach people concerning the Bible and you end up with a question that would puzzle most physicists.

Yet, the question has merit. I have found myself pondering this question from time to time. The more I thought about it, the more I saw that it was a profound question; the answer to which had far reaching implications. It brought to me a perspective on obedient Christian living that was life affirming, but which also shook me to the core.

You see, as Christians we are familiar with the conceptual use of light and darkness as parallels of good and evil. What is not apparent to most is that the statement just made is indeed false. Yes, it is what most Christians perceive. However, that perception is an error.

What do I mean? Simply this. It is a mistake to view the Scriptural use of light and darkness as just an analogy for good or evil. When we diminish these concepts to a mere analogy, we rob these concepts of their veracity and potency. In Scripture, light and darkness are not simply concepts used for illustrative purposes. They are real, powerful, inherent forces.

In other words, the Biblical authors were not at a script writing session discussing, “Okay. God is good. Satan is bad. What can we use to illustrate this concept?” As the discussion continues they stumble upon a correlation between good and light. “Aha!” the lead writer exclaims, “from now on good will be conceptualised as light and evil as dark!”

The reality is that evil is darkness and darkness is evil. Just as good is light and light is good. In Scripture, both are seen equally as inherent forces. They are, in a sense, tangible, palpable, intrinsic entities to be reckoned with.

To bring this issue into sharp relief, we need to think here in terms of antithesis. The basic presupposition of every Christian is, or at least should be, God is! This forms the building block for every piece of theology. God is. All that opposes God is not God, from God, or a part of God. God is infinite; the not God, finite. God is eternal; the not God, temporal. God is immutable; the not God, changeable.

This antithetic relation is also seen when viewing light and darkness. John says: “God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). Note what John does not say. John does not describe God as light, similar to light, or like light. No, God is light. Consequently, darkness has no part in His essential nature.

James brings out this same dictum when he refers to, “the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation, or shifting shadow” (James 1:17). Whist this text seems difficult, at first, its intent is extremely clear. God is understood in the plural (lights) as emanating a perfect light from multiple sources. The effect of this light emanating from multiple points is to eliminate every shadow.

Think here of a sports match under lights. Given the state of the light and the limited position of the light towers, it is not uncommon to see four or five distinct shadows following each player. Imagine now the same game, but with more towers, betters lights, and, in particular, light from above and below. Now, the perfect light eradicates every shadow. No matter where the player moves, shadows are an impossibility.

The perfection of this light and its intensity is also shown to us when God is described as He “who dwells in unapproachable light” (1 Timothy 6:16). The truth of this is borne out by other Biblical texts.

Consider the events surrounding Moses encounter with Yahweh. Moses wanted to meet God face to face. In Exodus 33:18-23 we read the following exchange: “Then Moses said, “I pray Thee, show me Thy glory!” And He said, “I Myself will make all My goodness pass before you, and will proclaim the name of the Lord before you; and I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show compassion on whom I will show compassion.” But He said, “You cannot see My face, for no man can see Me and live!” Then the Lord said, “Behold, there is a place by Me, and you shall stand there on the rock; and it will come about, while My glory is passing by, that I will put you in the cleft of the rock and cover you with My hand until I have passed by. “Then I will take My hand away and you shall see My back, but My face shall not be seen.”

Here, Moses asks to see Yahweh’s “glory”. Yahweh says, “No!” Instead, Moses is granted permission to only see Yahweh’s “goodness”. Even now, with this limited grant, Yahweh still insists that he shall hide Moses in the Rock and cover him with His hand until He has passed by. Then Moses will be granted a look at Yahweh’s back. What was the result of this encounter upon Moses? He shone. Moses was, in essence, irradiated by the light of Yahweh’s presence.

We read of a similar type of event in the New Testament when Jesus confronts one Saul of Tarsus on the road to Damascus. Acts 9:3 states, “And it came about that as he journeyed, he was approaching Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him.” When Paul relates this story to King Agrippa, he describes it in these words, “At midday, O King, I saw on the way a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining all around me.”[1]

These accounts serve to show how intrinsically light is allied to the being of God. This connection is not just that of an analogy for the purpose of explanation or illustration. It is far more. It is in essence, ontological.

This fact is borne out by John. When he opens his gospel he begins with this ontological antithesis. Jesus, God’s Son, the very nature of God, [2] comes to the world and is light. The world, fallen and rebellious – the not God—is darkness. Jesus mission is to liberate His people who are lost or bound in darkness by drawing them into the light.[3] That light is God. Yet, it is also to draw men to Himself, for Jesus is God.[4]

This truth is also borne out when we look at some further statements of Jesus and events surrounding His life. Jesus is establishing a Kingdom. That Kingdom is life and light. It is so because the King of that Kingdom is nothing less than Life and Light: “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light”.

Consequently, when a parallel is draw, and the focus falls upon those barred from the Kingdom, we see them described as being cast into darkness. Indeed, all those who rebel against God are said to be in darkness.

[The unfaithful Israelite] shall be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 8:12).
Then the king said to the servants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and cast him into the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 22:13).
And cast out the worthless slave into the outer darkness; in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth (Matthew 25:30).
For whom the black darkness has been reserved forever (Jude 13).[5]
These are springs without water, and mists driven by a storm, for whom the black darkness has been reserved (2 Peter 2:17).[6]
And angels who did not keep their own domain, but abandoned their proper abode, He has kept in eternal bonds under darkness for the judgment of the great day (Jude 6).

We must also take note of that peculiar event that took place as Jesus hung upon the cross dying. All the writers of the Synoptics tell us that the land was darkened from the sixth to the ninth hour.[7] Interestingly, the darkness did not descend when Jesus died, but as Jesus was dying. As the life drained from the Light of life, so darkness encroached. The symbol of God’s judgement came to the fore to show that His wrath was being poured out upon Jesus.

The potency of this statement is that darkness came at the precise time of noon. At the time when the sun should burn the brightest, it was snuffed out. What better cosmological testimony, to bear witness to the truth of Scripture, than to have the one created source of our light and life extinguish at the same time that Jesus, our eternal light and life, was being extinguished by God because He carried the sin of His people.

At this point many things could be said and need to be said about the wonder of Jesus’ death as life for His people. We need to understand His great substitutionary atonement. However, it is beyond the scope of this article to do so. For now, we need to focus upon the light and darkness. Jesus was light. God’s judgement, darkness. When Jesus fell under God’s just judgement, when Jesus was forsaken by God, the light failed and darkness enveloped the inhabitants.

When Jesus died, the light returned because the penalty had been paid. The debt owed had been repaid. God’s people had light and life once more. The true power of this fact had to wait until resurrection morn when Jesus arose from the dead. In essence, we still await its fullness in Jesus’ second coming. Yet, we have been given hints.[8] Note that when Jesus was transfigured His garments shone with exceeding brightness (Mark 9:3). On resurrection morn, the two Marys were confronted by an angel, whose “appearance was like lightning, and his garment as white as snow” (Matthew 8:23).[9] Then, when Jesus ascended, He is once more accompanied by two men in “white clothing” (Acts 1:9).

In short, we are given glimpses leading up to Jesus’ death, at Jesus’ resurrection, and at His ascension, that light is the dominant order of the Kingdom. This is put beyond doubt when we read in Revelation 4:5: “And from the throne proceed flashes of lightning and sounds and peals of thunder. And there were seven lamps of fire burning before the throne, which are the seven Spirits of God.” Note here the emphasis upon light in this text as it focuses upon God’s throne.[10] More importantly, we must note that the term for the “flashes of lightning” seen proceeding from the throne is the same term used to describe the Angels in Mathew 28:3 and Luke 24:4.

The brightness or radiance of God is therefore a tangible aspect that is reflected in those whom He possesses – His angels and His saints.

Okay. What, then, is the practical application for us?

Well, to answer this we need to return to the curly question? What happens to the darkness when light appears? The simple answer is that light dispels darkness. Light dissipates darkness.

However, more needs to be said. Imagine that you stand in the opening to a room. Before you is a thin veil to prevent leakage. The room is full of water. Suddenly, a large volume of air is pumped into the room. What would happen? You would get wet, very wet. You would be engulfed by one element as it was displaced by another. The same would happen if we reversed this process. This time you would feel a rush of wind.

Now for the challenge! Stand in a doorway in the dark. Flick the light switch and …! What did you feel? Any elements rush by? Did you feel the darkness running from the room? Did you find it hard to move around the rest of the house because there was now an extra room full of darkness spread out in the other rooms? Did you hear the darkness complaining as it moved passed your ear canals: “I wish they’d make up their minds. I was just getting comfortable and now I gotta shift!”

No, you felt nothing and you heard nothing. That is because the light dissipates the darkness by eliminating and overcoming it. We can think here of the space age ray guns. Unlike Captain James Tiberius Kirk, our ray guns are not set to stun, but to disintegrate. We are out to atomise and vaporise – even though these terms are in themselves inadequate descriptors.

When the light shines, darkness is overcome. It is dispelled. In the presence of light, darkness simply vanishes. It is destroyed and replaced.

This leads us to the “So what” of practical application.

Christian, strap yourself in! It is time for shock and awe!

In Matthew 5:14-16, Jesus gives His people a bit of a job description: “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do men light a lamp, and put it under the peck-measure, but on the lampstand; and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.”

Wow! Shock and Awe. Jesus is not the light of the world. You are! Okay, Jesus is the light of the world, but so are you, His blood bought disciple. The consequence of being Christ’s disciple is that you are the light of the world. You are not as light. You are not like light. You are the light of the world. This light cannot be hid. It must shine. It must illumine. It must overcome the darkness. So says Jesus!

Just as Jesus is one with the Father, so we, as Jesus’ blood bought disciples, are partakers of the Godhead. We become as our God. We become lights. Our essential nature becomes one of light. We are, as it were, luminaries of and for Christ, the eternal Son of God.[11]

This constitutes the “Awe” part of “Shock and Awe”. What a great blessing it is that God has so completely saved us that we are left awestruck and pondering the statement of John: “See how great a love the Father has bestowed upon us, that we should be called children of God; and such we are” (1 John 3:1). We are! We are the children of God through Jesus Christ! Mind blowing; yet beautiful and wondrous.

Now comes the “Shock”. How should we then live as God’s children? What does it mean to be the luminaries of God’s family? What burden or obligation does this place upon us?

Many modern Christians will simply not like what comes next, but it must be said. Many will agree that the world is dark. I have spoken to a number of Christians in recent times who are of the opinion that the “end is nigh”, based on the ungodliness of our time and culture. Yet, almost to a man, they have had no idea of their responsibility as light bearers.

The simple fact is that the world will always be the world.[12] It will always be a dark, smelly, putrid place, full of death and dying until Jesus makes all things new.[13] The ungodly will never be Godly apart from Christ. The point of this is that the Christians of our day tend to circle the wagons and then sit around the campfire moaning about the darkness in the world. Well, wake up people! Who are the lights? You are!!! If it is dark, shine!

If the word is dark it is because we are abandoning our God given task to “let our light shine.” It may be worth noting the imperative at this point. We could, and probably should, translate this text as “Shine your light before men!” It is not an option. We are light bearers by nature, by consequence of our newness of life in Christ. They only way that we can fail to shine is by deliberately choosing to veil that light – when place ourselves under a container.

Consequently, the pertinent question is, “Are we veiling the light of Jesus Christ?” The further question is, “Are we aiding the ‘deeds of darkness’[14] by failing in our task to provide an all pervasive and prevailing light to this world in Jesus name?”

How do we veil the light? Simple. We drift into sin. We begin to judge right and wrong by a measure of our own making rather than by God’s revealed Law-Word. We even abandon the idea of right and wrong by adopting a false view of God’s love. We enter upon practices that seem good to us, by our measure and our standard, but which are frowned upon by God.[15]

We slip in this direction because we have given up on reading God’s word. We no longer say with the Psalmist, “Thy Word is a lamp to my feet and a light to my path” (Psalm 119:105). Rather, we have become enamoured with pragmatism and the theory of “what works”. We have fallen in love with the concepts that the World has taught us. We are concerned to comply with the latest law of the civil magistrate in regard to our operation and worship, but we will not heed the dictates of Almighty God on these same subjects.

Why is this? Sadly, it is because we have lost the object of our love, Jesus Christ. We have allowed the rank individualism of our age to fill our senses with the heady aromas of autonomy and thereby lead us from Christ. Man fell precisely because he thought of glory for self before glory for God. Unfortunately, we are tainted still with that trait. Even as Christians, we are tempted to follow the dictates and desires of self rather than the dictates of God.

This penchant has resulted in us desiring our own glory and happiness above that of our Christ. Therefore, we adopt practices in worship that make us feel good and we then feign and project our acceptance with God. We rearrange our family to fit what is most appealing to me and my needs, and then invoke the name of the latest guru to justify our action. We capitulate to the demands of the world for tolerance and equality and comfort ourselves in the knowledge that God has told us to love everyone.

When the wheels fall off and we are faced with a crisis, what is our reaction? ‘Oh, the devil made me do it!’ ‘The world has encroached. They are insidious.’ ‘Oh, the church did not help my family.’ Yes, we are back in the Garden. Having believed the lie all over again, we resort to the same inane finger-pointing as did Adam and Eve.

It is time for us to “Man up!” It is time to accept that we have sinned against the One Holy God of heaven and His blessed Son, Jesus. It is time to confess before God that we have been disobedient and that we have hid the light of Christ through unfaithfulness. It is time to reject the error and tear down the false idols we have erected. It is time, in true humility, to genuinely repent of these sins and turn away from all that does not glorify God. It is time to turn back to God’s word and earnestly implore Him to teach us, through the Holy Spirit, of His standards, precepts, and law. It is time for us to accept God’s word as our only standard, to accept it willingly because it is God’s word, and to echo Christ’s words – My food is to do the will of Him who sent me (John 4:34).

If we are concerned about the darkness then we must shine. That is our task. That is our nature as God’s children. If our light is hindered it is because we have forgotten our first love and have begun to crawl under a basket. I implore your brethren, by the mercies of God, repent and shine.

There is a modern chorus that contains the words, “Shine Jesus Shine”. Many sing it with gusto. However, does it make an impact? The song needs more emphasis upon the fact that we are Christ’s light bearers. Yet, in fairness, it does contain the lines, “As we gaze on Your kingly brightness. So our faces display Your likeness. Ever changing from glory to glory, Mirrored here may our lives tell Your story.”

The point is that we should not just be asking Jesus to shine. We should not just be asking Jesus to “Shine on me”. We should be asking Jesus to shine with the full radiance of His brightness through us. This is the weakness of this chorus. It is individualistic and “me” centred. “Jesus, shine on me!” No. no. Jesus, please shine through me! Jesus, please shine through your people! Jesus, make us into the luminaries of your nature! Jesus, use us to dispel the darkness! These should be our prayers and pleas before the throne of grace.

Brethren, we are the light of the world. Our God-given power is that we can eradicate darkness through our Christ-like lives. It is ours, not to curse the darkness, but to eradicate it. It is ours to disintegrate both its power and presence.

Again, my friends, please think about this one fact. If we are surrounded by darkness, it is we, the children of God, who are at fault because our light is not present so as to overcome the darkness. We are failing in our task to illuminate this world for and with Christ.

Where does the darkness go when the light comes? I do not care where it goes. I am happy that the Christ-light dispels darkness. I am happy that righteous lives dispel darkness. I am happy that Jesus righteousness replaces the works of the Evil one. I am happy when darkness is gone because it means that God’s people are obeying their God and living in the brightness of his countenance.

Brethren, why do we let the darkness pervade our land and our lives? Do we love Jesus so little that we will not surrender all to him for His glory and the glory of our Father? Do we love Him, who gave His all, so little that we will not give up certain pleasures for His honour? Is not Jesus, the very essence of Wisdom, worth our being wise in the making of ethical decisions that will glorify His name?

May we all ask ourselves the sobering question, “Am I letting my light shine before men so that my Father in heaven is glorified by the watching world?”

[1] Acts 26:13.

[2] Hebrews 1:3 – “And He [the Son] is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power.”

[3] See Simeon’s prayer (Luke 2:29-32). See Zechariah’s prophecy regarding John, which had implications for Jesus (Luke 67-79). See the beginning of Jesus’ ministry (Matthew 4:15-16) Compare: John 3:19; 8:12; 12:46; Ephesians 5:8; 1Thessalonians 5:5.

[4] John 6:44; John 12:32; John 9:5; John 11:9; 2 Corinthians 4:3-6.

[5] Jude’s phrase here could be translated as the blackness of darkness, the gloom of darkness, or the gloom of the nether regions. The last of these is more interpretive. The importance is that it once more shows the fact that the nether world, God’s place of judgement, is a place where His essential nature is not. Thus, it is totally bereft of light.

[6] Peter here uses the same phrase as Jude.

[7] That is from noon to 3pm.

[8] One very clear hint is seen in the dead saints raised at the precise time of Jesus’ death. In Jesus’ death, men lived.

[9] See also: John 20:12; Mark 16:5; and Luke 24:4. Luke’s “dazzling apparel” has parallel to Matthews “like lightening”. The term expresses a gleaming brightness.

[10] Fire is throughout Scripture a covenantal sign of God’s presence.

[11] John 17: 9-11; 17-23: “I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom Thou hast given Me; for they are Thine; and all things that are Mine are Thine, and Thine are Mine; and I have been glorified in them. “And I am no more in the world; and yet they themselves are in the world, and I come to Thee. Holy Father, keep them in Thy name, the name which Thou hast given Me, that they may be one, even as We are … “Sanctify them in the truth; Thy word is truth. “As Thou didst send Me into the world, I also have sent them into the world. “And for their sakes I sanctify Myself, that they themselves also may be sanctified in truth. “I do not ask in behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; that they may all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be in Us; that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me. “And the glory which Thou hast given Me I have given to them; that they may be one, just as We are one; I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, that the world may know that Thou didst send Me, and didst love them, even as Thou didst love Me.” See also 2 Peter 1:4.

[12] It is important to understand that the term “world”, when used by Scripture, often means ‘an ethical system that is opposed to God’s rule’. An illustration of the attitude implied is seen in the “kings and rulers of the earth” who plot against God and His Messiah saying “let us cast off their fetters!” It is a desire for autonomy. It is a desire to return to the Garden and once again challenge God’s sovereign right to rule.

[13] John 3:19: “And this is the judgment, that the light is come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the light; for their deeds were evil.”

[14] Ephesians 5:11

[15] Read the story of Ahaz in 2 Kings 16:10-16. Note how he sees a pagan altar, copies it, and brings it into Yahweh’s temple. Note his offerings and sacrifices. They are the Biblically prescribed offerings, but they are offered on a pagan altar. Consequently, they are not offered to Yahweh with a pure heart. This is simply religious motility, not true worship. It is syncretism. It is the blending of the true and the false, which renders all false and unacceptable to God.

Leadership: A Reflection of the People

Posted on April 11, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

As a people we are often highly critical of our leaders, particularly those in the political sphere. These criticisms, on the part of some, can lead to bitterness and sheer hatred. Such has been evidenced in recent days with the passing of Margaret Thatcher, the former British Prime Minister.

It was, to say the least, disturbing to see people in the street celebrating and toasting her death. One person interviewed, filled with morbid glee began to chant, ‘The wicked witch is dead!’

There seems to this author to be several inherent problems with such callous displays.

1. Dictatorship: Whilst Maggie was nicknamed the “Iron Lady”, there is no evidence that she was a bloody dictator. One could understand great cheers at her demise, if she had been the instigator of death squads and midnight disappearances.

However, her greatest wrong seems to have been nothing more than a forthright and honest effort to rectify the failings in and of her nation.

2. Democracy: I am often puzzled by the reactions of the electorate towards representatives in power; by comments made in the media, particularly by politicians. England, like Australia, is a democracy – well that is what they would like us to believe! People are elected by the majority vote. Why is it then that some are so critical of people elected to office? Why is it that opposition spokesmen, especially those recently tipped from power, are so vociferous against their fellows?

It seems to me that we are unhappy with democracy or at least the form of democracy under which we toil. In regard to Maggie, the simple reality is that she was the longest serving British Prime Minister of the 20^th century. The majority of the British people thought that she was the best of the choices available for that period of time. Therefore, to gloatingly rejoice at the death of an elected representative is to mock democracy.

Now, I do not like Julia Gillard, our current Prime Minister. I do not like her for a substantial number of reasons. However, I must accept that our system has allowed her to become Prime Minister of this country. To do otherwise, is to attack the concept of democracy on which our country is founded. It is also, and this is the real issue, to agitate for a more despotic system of government.

This seems to be the point missed by most. To celebrate or desire the death of a leader when they have done nothing worthy of death is to inherently attack the system of government and democracy upon which our respective countries have been founded.

It is also, of course, a theological issue. It is to say to God that we are unwilling to rest under His providence. It is to say to God that we deserve other than that which He has given to us. Again, the problem with such criticisms is that they are based solely in the subjective opinion of the voter. The lazy person who has existed on government handouts will vote for the person who prolongs and increases these handouts and not for the government that is going to call him to account. Similarly, the person who works hard and pays taxes is going to vote for the person who, in their opinion, best uses those taxes.

The issue with both of these positions is that they are nothing more than subjective elements being expressed by fallen men. They are not the dictates of Almighty God.

3. Desert: This leads us to consider what I would think is the “elephant in the room” in regard to this topic.

What is man’s desert? Okay, I may need to be a little didactic. No, I am not talking about a waste region. I have not misspelled the word referring to that part of a meal that is full of sweet goodies. I am speaking of the archaic form of the word “deserve”. We most commonly understand it in its plural form in the idiom, “just deserts”. The phrase means to be given a reward, good or bad, for one’s actions. Consequently, we must explore the question of the desert of the voters.

In our modern Western democracies, we tend to see the voter as all powerful. It is people power in action. “Yea!” for us. We the people elect the representative most suited to the welfare of the people; and we the people are never wrong.[1] Well, at least this is the fundamental presupposition that we are taught and on which we are urged to vote.

However, if this fundamental presupposition be so right, why is there so much dissatisfaction with government? Why are governments so unable to resolve problems?

Please, unveil the elephant!! (Shield the children’s eyes!)

In our godless Western democracies, we shut God out of the picture. Therefore, we never stop to contemplate that, in regard to the election of officials, often God gives us exactly what we deserve! We never ask the question, “Has God given us the ruler we deserve and not the ruler we need?”

2 Samuel 24:1 states: “Now again the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and it incited David against them to say, “Go, number Israel and Judah.” Here we see clearly that God is angry with His people. Israel had sinned and Yahweh was displeased with this sin. Yahweh’s method at this point was to “incite” the king to an action against the people in order to manifest that sin and bring judgement upon the people (c.f 2 Samuel 21:1 ff)

In light of such a statement, we must ask ourselves if our leaders do not act foolishly at times because the Lord God Almighty is indeed angry with us as a people. We are quick to react against seemingly silly and errant decisions on the part of our leaders, but do we ever stop to ask, “Is this foolishness a consequence of my sin?”

As that question resonates in your mind, do not forget the apostle Paul’s teaching in Romans chapter one. There, in verse 24, 26, and 28, Paul acknowledges that God “gave them up” to their sinful desires as a judgement in consequence of their sinful desires.[2]

When we view these two principles in combination, we are faced with the fact that, in the political realm, God will in fact incline to our cry as a people and give us what we want, not what we need. In short, God will give us our just deserts; the very thing that we deserve for our constant rebellion against Him.

David’s sin seemed innocuous. Yet it was devastating! What is wrong with counting heads? To us, maybe nothing. However, we must respect the text and note two important things. In 2 Samuel 24:10 David’s heart was stricken and he realised that he “had sinned greatly against the Lord.” Then in 2 Samuel 24:15we see that seventy-thousand men perish from the land as a result of the pestilence brought by God’s judgement.

David’s sin in counting the people may have been an act of foolishness that denied the protective power of Yahweh. It may be that he momentarily relied upon the numbers of men rather than Yahweh’s sovereign power. For us, the matter is really inconsequential. It matters naught what motive David had. At this juncture we need to hold fast to the two major premises of the text. First, Israel sinned. Consequently, the anger of Yahweh burned against Israel. Second, in order to bring judgement, David was provoked to an act if sin in order to facilitate the required judgement.[3]

Thus, when unpacked this text shows us clearly that the guilt belonged to the people and the people ultimately paid the penalty. The king was secondary in the incident. His actions were but the trigger. The obvious import of this text, its clarion lesson, is aimed at the people and not the ruler.

When these things are considered, we may well have an “Aha!” moment in which we realise that the circus in Canberra is a consequence of us as a people sinning before the Lord. It may be that we get a good glimpse at that elephant and realise that it is within our power to open the door and usher it away.

There is a distinct Biblical principle that shows that the people will never be better than their leaders. However, as we have seen, even when there is a good ruler, the sin of the people can cause that ruler to do foolish things with disastrous consequences for the people.

When we pour out our prayers to God in regard to our governments – and they certainly need our prayers – do we stop to offer a prayer asking for the forgiveness of the sins of the people? Do we contemplate that laws on homosexuality, abortion, and euthanasia, begin with the desires of many within our nation and not just with elected officials?

What then will be our response to this situation? Are we prepared to tackle these issues with our fellow citizens? Next time you are involved in a conversation and an expression of dissatisfaction is made, will you ask that person the question, “Has your sin put that person in office or brought this decision to the fore?”

It is sobering, is it not, to think that our sin as a people could be the very reason that God has allowed a Julia Gillard to be elected and to prosper, despite foolishness, opposition, discontent, and rancour?

If we desire to see Revival and Reformation in this land, then it is time that we, the people, began to confess sin and shun evil.[4] When we clean up our act and prove a desire before God for righteousness, maybe our Lord will relent and give us the governments we need to continue the pursuit of righteousness.

Next time you are apt to criticise or share in the criticism of the elected officials in this nation, can you please pause and ask, “Has my sin contributed to our current estate?” Then we need to ask ourselves what we are doing to quell the sin of the nation. Does my position allow me to instigate a programme that would see people sin less? Do I have the ability to teach and mentor in such a way that people would sin less? Am I willing to give up comfort in order to point out sin to people?

In an election year we would do well to ask ourselves these and similar questions. We are apt in our despondency to lodge a “donkey vote” or an informal vote. Yet it is worth remembering that the Donkey we have to saddle come September 14 may have a lot to do with the asses that voted!

Sin is a disgrace to any people (Proverbs 14:34). Does our sin, as a people, make for disgraceful government in our nation? Now there is a question to contemplate!

[1] Please see the following series of articles: John Jacques Rousseau, “The Social Contract” by Isaac Thomas: http://www.daniel244.org/blog/?p=239

[2] Verse 24 = “Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity”; Verse 26 = “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions”; Verse 28 = “And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper.” Throughout this section there is an obvious cause and effect of covenantal judgement in place. God’s judgement was to allow people to be swallowed up in the depths of their desired depravity.

[3] It seems also fair to state that Yahweh’s use of David was also an act of divine grace. Whilst David’s sin supplied a trigger for Yahweh’s judgement, David’s heartfelt repentance also mediated the situation. David was given the choice of three judgements. David’s choice was option four – to throw him and his people upon divine mercy. Please also note that although it was Yahweh who “relented” and halted the pestilence, David nonetheless went out to the “angel of the Lord” and offered sacrifices. So it seems that David both caused the judgement of God to come, but through his relationship with God also mediated grace in the midst of judgement.

[4] See: 1 Kings 8:33-40.

A Battle Plan (Pt. 8)

Posted on February 19, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

C. The Purpose of the Armour: What then is the purpose of this armour? Many become embroiled in deep discussions over each piece of the armour whilst missing the essential point as to why the armour is given. It is important to clear away the clutter so that we can see, adjudge, and obey God’s word. To direct us in the way, we need to listen to the Apostle’s words in verses 11 and 13:

Put on the full armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil.

Therefore, take up the full armor of God, that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm.

Everything else in this passage of Scripture is governed by these words. It is in these words that we find the purpose for all the rest of Paul’s words. The armour is given so that the Christian may “resist” and “stand firm”. This point needs to be understood and proclaimed. As I look at Christians and Christianity today, the words ‘resist’ and ‘stand firm’ are not the words that readily spring to mind as apt descriptors. The more appropriate terms would be “capitulate” and “lie down”.

Therefore, my brethren, may I urge you to understand what the Holy Spirit is here saying to the Church through the apostle Paul.

When we look at verses 11 and 13 we see that they are essentially a reflection of each other. Both command the Christian to do something with God’s armour (Put on! Take up!). Both give the purpose (Stand firm! Resist!). Both tell us what to stand against (Devil’s schemes; Evil day). Please note that Paul’s argument does not admit of capitulation or compromise. There is no running away; there is no fleeing. Our obligation is to “Stand!”

Harking back to the previously quoted texts in Joshua, if we have turned our backs to our enemies it is because of disobedience to God’s command and the consequent withdrawal of His favour. When we look about the Church and we see capitulation and back turning, it is because of disobedience. This point was made earlier and you were asked to keep it in mind. Why? Precisely because that principle still operates today. God cannot and will not bless disobedience. If we are running from our enemies it is because of disobedience to God’s holy standard. We have given up on doing as God has commanded. We have respectfully but erroneously informed God that we Christians in the 21^st century, having Facebook, Twitter, Youtube, the WWW, and so on, are just that bit more advanced and wiser than our forebears. We have even impugned God be inferring that we are a bit smarter than He is and that we do not need to follow His specific commands because of our enlightened status (Ring any bells? Think Adam. It ended badly!). The simple, Biblical truth, which cannot be ignored, is that we flee from our enemies only because God has withdrawn His blessing on account of our persistent disobedience!

Let’s do some reverse engineering here with Paul’s logic. Paul commands that we take up the armour of God that we might stand firm. If we turn this around, the question is this: Christian, do you have any intention of fighting or standing firm? If not, it is disobedience and you will not need the armour. In such a situation, the armour will only hinder your running away and ‘lying down’. If you answer yes, it is obedience and the only way you can achieve your goal is by being clothed in Christ Jesus. Thus, we all have one very specific question that we must ask and answer; Flee or Fight?

Please understand that I speak foolishly as according to man. For the text does not admit, at any point, of the Christian having such a choice (though to look at some quarters of the Church you could be forgiven for believing that such a choice existed). Paul is insistent that our only option is to stand. Therefore, we must be arrayed in the Armour of God.

Paul’s insistence is clearly evident in the text. We have looked at verses 11 and 13. Now, please look at the opening of verse 14. Paul opens his explanation of the armour with a command – Stand Firm! Paul has twice commanded the Christian to take up the armour so as to be clothed appropriately. In those places, Paul has subordinated the purpose – standing firm – to the taking up of the armour. Here, that changes. Paul now opens with the command to “Stand firm!” With the command issued, Paul then moves on to the specifics of each piece of armour. In other words, Paul is insistent on two things – take the armour and stand firm!

Please try and grasp this. Paul wants every Christian to walk the victorious life in Christ – the life of the soldier. Pauline writings are replete with the symbols of Christ’s victory. Because Christ Jesus is victor, His redeemed ones are to be likewise victorious. We bring no glory to our God or to Jesus our Redeemer when we are defeated because of disobedience. Consequently, Paul gives us the keys to victory. We must stand firm and we can only stand firm when we are fully clothed in Christ. We cannot stand without the armour and the armour is useless if we will not stand. This is not an ‘either / or’ situation. It is a ‘both / and’ situation.

If we decide to stand, but do so without armour, we are being disobedient and will therefore fail. If we have no resolve to stand in obedience to God’s command, then being clothed in the finest armour avails nought. This too is disobedience.

Understood in this manner, Paul is really giving only one clear command – “To victory in Jesus Christ!” However, Paul does this by giving us two unambiguous commands. The first is the command of purpose – “Christian, you must stand!” The second is the command of instrument – “Put on God’s panoply!”

Maybe, with a bit of poetic licence, we could bring Paul to life. Imagine him as the general in front of His troops delivering a rousing speech. In short sharp words and with authority and conviction, Paul is heard to say: “This is the evil day, the day of battle. The enemy approaches. Honour Jesus! – Your King who died for you. Make your stand; give no ground. Make you stand. Clothe yourself in Christ Jesus, the very Armour of God! Clothe yourself, I say, and make your stand. For this is the ‘making sure of your calling and election!” (2 Peter 1:10-11; Ephesians 4:1-6; Philemon 2; 2 Timothy 2:3)

Therefore, please understand this imperative. God’s Armour is given to the Christian for a purpose. That purpose is so that, in obedience to His calling as a soldier, you may stand firm. God’s Armour ensures obedience to God’s command and therefore the wonderful state of being blessed by God.

Brethren, let is dwell in the blessing and victory that is ours through Jesus Christ by clothing ourselves in God’s armour with the full resolve that, with all our might and with all Spiritual aid, we shall stand firm in the evil day.

A Battle Plan (Pt. 6)

Posted on January 29, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

3. Three Points Regarding the Christian’s Armour.

A. Our Armour is God’s Armour: The first thing to note is that we are clothed in God’s armour. This is not an illusion to the text, but it is an illusion to the text. Confused? Paul tells us to put on the “armour of God”. What we must understand is that this metaphorical usage is not just a metaphor that Paul has dreamt up and applied based on seeing Roman soldiers. Rather, it is a borrowed metaphor and as such has actual Biblical substance. “Borrowed from Whom?” you may ask. Borrowed from none other than God Himself! Most of the references to the individual pieces of armour are taken from Isaiah 59:17, where Yahweh is pictured as going to war:

Now the Lord saw, and it was displeasing in His sight that there was no justice. And He saw that there was no man, and was astonished that there was no one to intercede; Then His own arm brought salvation to Him; And His righteousness upheld Him. And He put on righteousness like a breastplate, and a helmet of salvation on His head; And He put on garments of vengeance for clothing, and wrapped Himself with zeal as a mantle. According to their deeds, so He will repay, Wrath to His adversaries, recompense to His enemies; To the coastlands He will make recompense. So they will fear the name of the Lord from the west and His glory from the rising of the sun, For He will come like a rushing stream, Which the wind of the Lord drives. “And a Redeemer will come to Zion, And to those who turn from transgression in Jacob,” declares the Lord. (Isaiah 59:15a-20)

We are also told in Isaiah 11:5 that the Branch will exhibit some of these attributes:

Also righteousness will be the belt about His loins, And faithfulness the belt about His waist.¹

As a consequence, we need to understand that Paul is not inventing a new metaphor, rather he is picking up and applying previously used metaphoric language. This is important for our understanding of this passage:

First, it reinforces a point made earlier about the unity of Scripture and the warfare portrayed therein. It is not a mosaic. It is panoramic.
Second, we are forced to look to Scripture for understanding and meaning as to what each piece of armour means. Note this point well. Paul only explains two pieces of armour in his list. These are pieces that Paul introduces under inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Paul tells us of the shield and the sword. The former is for the extinguishing of flaming arrows; the latter is identified as the Word of God. Conversely, Paul does not explain or define any of the pieces that are listed directly from Scripture. Interesting? Yes?! Why is this? It is because Paul expects us to know and understand the passages from which he quotes. In using these metaphors, Paul encapsulates wonderful Biblical truths which are pregnant with meaning. Thus, we should not guess or look to the esoteric to understand their significance. We should study God’s word.
Third, this is Yahweh’s armour. Really! When Paul urges us to be clothed in this armour he is pointing to something tangible. God in the fullness of the Trinity is said to be clothed in this panoply. Should we doubt that which is acceptable to our God? Think here of young David. He ventures into the camp of Israel. He finds them afraid of a giant named Goliath. Under God’s hand he goes to fight the giant. What does the king do? Saul clothes David in his armour (1 Samuel 17:38-40). In this instance, the things offered to David were ill fitting and a hindrance to his ability to fight. Question. Did David go into battle without armour? No, he did not! He may not have had sword or helmet, but he was far from exposed. David possessed something far better — Then David said to the Philistine, “You come to me with a sword, a spear, and a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have taunted. “This day the Lord will deliver you up into my hands, and I will strike you down and remove your head from you. And I will give the dead bodies of the army of the Philistines this day to the birds of the sky and the wild beasts of the earth, that all the earth may know that there is a God in Israel, and that all this assembly may know that the Lord does not deliver by sword or by spear; for the battle is the Lord’s and He will give you into our hands (1 Samuel 17:45-47). David did not have armour; he had ARMOUR! Consequently, we should have great confidence. We are not left exposed by the ill fitting garments of an earthly king, which need to be discarded. Rather, we are sheathed in the perfect Armour of the Great King of Heaven. Perfect fit. Perfect in power. Perfect for every occasion.

Footnotes:

1. There is also allusion to Isaiah 52:7.

A Battle Plan (Pt. 4)

Posted on January 21, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

D. The Biblical view: When these threads are pulled together we are faced with the consistent Biblical picture in regard to Christian Warfare:

Lesson 1: Our warfare is Spiritual. It is powered by the Holy Spirit. The battle cannot be effectively engaged or won when clothed in any other power.
Lesson 2. Our warfare is spiritual. It involves powers and authorities in the heavenly. On both sides.
Lesson 3. Our warfare is fleshy. We are engaged in this battle as man. We oppose other men. We must act in the corporeal against the corporeal.
Lesson 4. Our warfare is fleshy, not fleshly. It is of man as man, not of man as sinful man; though we oppose sinful man. Harking back to Paul, our warfare is fought in the flesh, not according to the flesh.
Lesson 5. Our warfare, of necessity, involves action on our part. There is no warfare if the soldiers do not break camp! As with Israel, so it is with the Church. The soldiers must mobilise even though they fight for and under Yahweh.

A Battle Plan (Pt. 2)

Posted on January 12, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

B. An Old Testament View: When we look at the Old Testament we are immediately aware of the many battles in which Israel was engaged. Whether they were battles to enter the Promised Land; battles inflicted because of disobedience; or internal battles for either righteousness or disobedience, there were many battles.

For brevity’s sake, I will take it that this point is understood and agreed upon. The question then is, “What type of battles were these, fleshy or spiritual? As stated, the common belief is that these were fleshy battles that had little spiritual significance. Such a belief is disastrous and has wreaked untold havoc on the Church. This belief has come to us through those who have sought to place a great cavern between Old and New Testaments and treat them as though they were alien to each other. May it never be!

When we turn to the pages of Scripture, to our only rule for life, faith, and instruction, we see plainly that Israel’s battles were indeed spiritual. Consider these texts:

When you go out to battle against your enemies and see horses and chariots and people more numerous than you, do not be afraid of them; for the Lord your God, who brought you up from the land of Egypt, is with you. “Now it shall come about that when you are approaching the battle, the priest shall come near and speak to the people. “And he shall say to them, ‘Hear, O Israel, you are approaching the battle against your enemies today. Do not be fainthearted. Do not be afraid, or panic, or tremble before them, for the Lord your God is the one who goes with you, to fight for you against your enemies, to save you. (Deuteronomy 20:1-4)
Now it came about when Joshua was by Jericho, that he lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, a man was standing opposite him with his sword drawn in his hand, and Joshua went to him and said to him, “Are you for us or for our adversaries?” And he said, “No, rather I indeed come now as captain of the host of the Lord.” And Joshua fell on his face to the earth, and bowed down, and said to him, “What has my lord to say to his servant?” And the captain of the Lord’s host said to Joshua, “Remove your sandals from your feet, for the place where you are standing is holy.” And Joshua did so. (Joshua 5:13-15)
Now when the attendant of the man of God had risen early and gone out, behold, an army with horses and chariots was circling the city. And his servant said to him, “Alas, my master! What shall we do?” So he answered, “Do not fear, for those who are with us are more than those who are with them.” Then Elisha prayed and said, “O Lord, I pray, open his eyes that he may see.” And the Lord opened the servant’s eyes, and he saw; and behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha. (2 Kings 6:15-17)
Now when the Philistines heard that the sons of Israel had gathered to Mizpah, the lords of the Philistines went up against Israel. And when the sons of Israel heard it, they were afraid of the Philistines. Then the sons of Israel said to Samuel, “Do not cease to cry to the Lord our God for us, that He may save us from the hand of the Philistines.” And Samuel took a suckling lamb and offered it for a whole burnt offering to the Lord; and Samuel cried to the Lord for Israel and the Lord answered him. Now Samuel was offering up the burnt offering, and the Philistines drew near to battle against Israel. But the Lord thundered with a great thunder on that day against the Philistines and confused them, so that they were routed before Israel. And the men of Israel went out of Mizpah and pursued the Philistines, and struck them down as far as below Beth-car. (1 Samuel 7:7-11)

More texts could be adduced, but these are sufficient to prove the point we are making. Although Israel marched forward with shields, swords, bows, and spears, it was ultimately Yahweh for whom they fought and, most importantly, it was Yahweh who fought for Israel.

In the texts paraded, it is impossible to miss the spiritual overtones. Here, I would particularly highlight the texts from Joshua and 2 Kings. In the former, Joshua is contemplating how to conquer Jericho. In a moment, he notices a figure standing with sword drawn. Joshua’s first reaction is to challenge this person, presuming a) that it is his right as Israel’s captain; and b) that the One before him is but a man. The answer to his challenge made Joshua realise that this was no ordinary man. Importantly, Joshua realised that he was a man under Authority. The One before him was the none other than the “captain of the host of the Lord.” Now, whether we associate this figure with “the Angel of the Lord” or with a high ranking angel, such as a Michael, the point is the same – Joshua, the man, was aided in his war by the angelic host of heaven. The presence of this ‘host’ did not mean that Joshua could retire to his tent for a spa and a massage while the angels went forth to “kick bottom”. No, it just meant that the battle took on a greater importance and was viewed, as it were, with a wide angle lens that captured the activities of the heavenly.

The passage from 2 Kings is equally enlightening. The king of Aram was being thwarted by the prophecies of Elisha. So much so that he thought he had a traitor in his midst (2 Kings 6:11). When it was told to him that Elisha was the problem, he sent his men to capture the prophet. As the text shows, Elisha’s servant arose and saw the army sent to capture the man of God, and was quite disturbed. Not so Elisha. When the servant’s eyes were opened at Elisha’s request, he saw the area filled with flaming horses and chariots. The Arameans were indeed outnumbered and powerless.

I might also draw you attention to the first text cited, that of Deuteronomy 20:1-4. I would simply direct your attention to the covenantal and salvific overtones of the text. Israel is called, in very specific terms, to remember that God is with them. These terms are significant precisely because they speak of Yahweh’s salvation of His people and His covenanting with them – “who brought you out of the land of Egypt” (Salvation); “I will be your God and you will be My people!” (Covenant). Note also the role of the priest. Israel’s battles involved Israel’s God who had saved them from slavery by covenant promise and turned them into a community of Yahweh worshipping Priestly–Kings.¹

Therefore, on the basis of this evidence, it seems quite ridiculous to posit, in any shape or form, that the warfare of Israel was not spiritual in nature. In fact, it was spiritual – a truth borne out by the covenantal nature of this warfare. Note well that Israel fought for Yahweh and was delivered by Yahweh only when Israel went forth in obedience. There are many accounts of Israel being defeated precisely because Israel did not act in total obedience to Yahweh’s command. One very clear example comes from the book of Joshua, just two chapters after that quoted above. High in spirits, because of the conquest at Jericho, Israel moves to take Ai. Joshua decides to spell some of his troops thinking the battle will go easily for the Lord is on their side. However, Israel was routed. Joshua perplexed. A lesson needed to be learnt. Thus we read:

But the sons of Israel acted unfaithfully in regard to the things under the ban, for Achan, the son of Carmi, the son of Zabdi, the son of Zerah, from the tribe of Judah, took some of the things under the ban, therefore the anger of the Lord burned against the sons of Israel … And Joshua said, “Alas, O Lord God, why didst Thou ever bring this people over the Jordan, only to deliver us into the hand of the Amorites, to destroy us? If only we had been willing to dwell beyond the Jordan! “O Lord, what can I say since Israel has turned their back before their enemies? “For the Canaanites and all the inhabitants of the land will hear of it, and they will surround us and cut off our name from the earth. And what wilt Thou do for Thy great name?” So the Lord said to Joshua, “Rise up! Why is it that you have fallen on your face? “Israel has sinned, and they have also transgressed My covenant which I commanded them. And they have even taken some of the things under the ban and have both stolen and deceived. Moreover, they have also put them among their own things. “Therefore the sons of Israel cannot stand before their enemies; they turn their backs before their enemies, for they have become accursed. I will not be with you anymore unless you destroy the things under the ban from your midst. (Joshua 7:1; 7-12)

This foray into the Old Testament teaches us two important points. First, the warfare of the Old Testament was indeed spiritual. Second, we are taught that the warfare is also covenantal and is therefore dependent upon obedience on the part of God’s people. These lessons need to be kept firmly in mind as we move forward in our discussion.

Footnotes:

1. If you have any questions about how this relates to you as a Christians, may I commend to you 1 Peter 2:4-10. The typology is very hard to miss.

A Battle Plan (Pt. 1)

Posted on January 12, 2013 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

The Essence of War was a two part article published recently. Feedback on that article suggested two flaws or inadequacies. One asked for a “Battle Plan”. The other, thought the focus should have been more on prayer and weaponry or at least their role should have been highlighted. Taking these comments seriously, I would like to try and give some further explanation.

First, it needs to be understood that The Essence of War was not seeking to paint the whole picture. It was focussed on calling Christians to wake–up to the fact that there is a war raging. This may seem very obvious to some Christians. However, let me assure you that I have run into many who either do not understand that they are in a war or who, having grasped the concept, have little clue about the nature of the battle.

Second, the issue of Christian warfare is a big topic. At best, I hope here to scratch out a useful outline that may give direction and help people to engage in the battle effectively.

Third, please be prepared to sacrifice some sacred cows, jettison long held fallacies, and, most of all, adopt the “Berean Attitude” (Acts 17:11). One of the reasons that the Church is so befuddled today can be summed up in the term “Biblical illiteracy”. In short, as part of our compromise, Christians have stopped reading and, in particular, understanding the Bible. It would seem that they would rather read a book about the Bible, than put the effort into reading and understanding the Bible itself. The remedy can only be to re-immerse ourselves in God’s expired (breathed out), Holy Spirit authored, Christ magnifying Scriptures; accompanied by a simple yet fervent prayer that God would give us understanding and wisdom.

1. Christian Warfare.

A. Spiritual Warfare: The first issue necessary to understanding Christian Warfare is indeed to understand the terms. You will note that I have not, in general, used the more common term “Spiritual Warfare”. I avoid this term because it has become loaded with the terminology of the “other”. By this I mean that there has been an increasing trend in Christian circles to see everything as belonging to another realm or another time. Thus, many Christians, for instance, no longer believe that God reveals His wrath in time and space. They claim that God will only judge at the end of time.¹ Now it is true that there is a judgement at the end of time. However, Romans 1:18 clearly tells us that the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven. Another instance would be the way in which Christ is seen only as love and peace. Yet Scripture posits that Jesus is in fact God’s Judge (Acts 17:30-31). We have, in modern Christianity, seemingly lost the ability to hold two truths together. The ultimate example of this would be in regard to the character of God. We seem unable to hold together the myriad and perfect attributes of God as they are revealed in Scripture. This being the case, it is not a wonder that we have trouble with lesser concepts.

The same can be said in regard to Christian warfare. Through the influence of faulty theologies that see the Old and New Testaments as in some way opposed to each other (discontinuity or radical discontinuity), it has become popular to understand that the Old Testament was filled with fleshy warfare – swords, shields, warhorses – whereas the New Testament is spiritual warfare – prayer and evil spirits.

I would like to posit at the outset that such a delineation is an outright fallacy and a case of wrongly dividing the word of truth (Contra 2 Timothy 2:15). It is errors like these that, over time embedding themselves into Christian doctrine and teaching, have really robbed Christians both of the will and ability to understand and engage in Christian Warfare.

The simple reality is that both Testaments teach exactly the same point. It is, at best, the emphasis that differs.

Footnotes:

1. Of course there are a growing number who deny God’s judgement completely.

Lines in the Sand

Posted on December 17, 2012 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

In recent months we have been focusing upon the fact that Christians are involved in a global war. This war, by its very nature, encompasses each of us in every aspect of our lives. That is to say, you cannot escape the impact or consequence of this war even if you choose to be a pacifist – not an option for the Christian (1 Timothy1:18; 1 Timothy 6:12). The war is religious. It is, by necessary consequence, moral and ethical. Therefore, it is cultural.

It is for this reason that you cannot escape this war. Everything around you is impacted, to some degree, by this war. The future of our culture is being shaped by the salvos fired both yesterday and today. Many, unfortunately, do not see this. Think about this for a little while and you will see the truth of the matter. We may describe it in terms of Newton’s Third Law of Motion – every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If a politician makes a law today, that law must have consequences.1 Indeed, at some point down the track, it will have consequences. Those consequences may be minor. It may not amount to much more than a waste of tax-payer dollars and the raising of the blood pressure of some middle level, paper shufflers firmly entrenched in State bureaucracy. On the other hand, the impact could be huge with devastating effects that are seen for generations.

Of recent, our government has seemingly been bent on introducing us to legislation and policies that fit into the last category. Even as I write, there is a draft bill on “Discrimination” that sits waiting in the wings —a Bill laden with Humanistic error and which is aimed at tearing any remnants of the Bible’s God from this nation.

It is time for the Christians of this nation to draw a line in the sand and say, nay shout, “Enough is enough!”

For far too long, we, as Christians, have acquiesced to the government’s demands. Our insipid theology coupled with a desire to be popular, has led us into a dark and dangerous place. We have willingly taken money from the government to build our “Christian Schools”. Then the mean “Piper” wanted to be paid. His money came with strings and restrictions. Was having a new building really worth being made to dance to the Statist’s tune? We have allowed the government to dictate to us what shall be taught as “religious instruction” in State schools. I ask, “How do we, with a good conscience, teach a Christless gospel?” “What do we believe we are achieving by acquiescing to these false standards?” Yes, I will be criticised. Many good Christians teach RE, however, I have not meet one yet who has told me that they are free to open their Bible and say, “Thus says the Lord God!” To a man, they have all commented that they need to, in some degree, ‘be careful’ and move within the set curriculum. Some are very inventive in navigating this minefield. Nonetheless, it cannot be denied that there is a minefield in need of being navigated! Two points must be grasped. First, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is chained! Second, these are the good teachers! How many RE teachers come from Liberal and other false backgrounds and simply spew out the State approved pabulum?

Please understand, these points are merely illustrative of the way in which Christians have, to one degree or another, modified their belief system in order to please their Statist masters. Many other illustrations could be given. In the final analysis, we must ask, “What has been the outcome of this compromise?” Has the Church finally shown that it is open and tolerant enough to be trusted by the State? Has the State been convinced by our actions that we really are trying to “fit in” and join the “brotherhood of man”? Not at all. This is a war, remember! It is winner takes all. Compromise has only weakened Christianity. The opposite effect is that it has emboldened the State to continue on with its agenda of subjugation of people to its will. Therefore, it is time that Christians drew a line in the sand.

The State continues to demand allegiance to its core beliefs. It continues to pass legislation that enforces those beliefs. All dissenters are forced, in one way or another, to capitulate to the State’s demands. The more that is gained, the more the State hungers for total control. Do you believe this? Do you see this?

We started by noting the cultural war and its impact upon you and me. Let me give some examples of this war and how the State operates to subjugate.

Case 1. Some years ago, the local council made some funding available to local community groups under the heading “Game On.” The money was to encourage local community groups to celebrate the Commonwealth Games. Our homeschool group expressed interest. We met with the artist in charge. As leader of the group, I asserted from the outset that, as a Christians group, we would like to have a text of Scripture so that the artwork reflected our identity. The artist could see no problem with this. As a group, we chose the following words: “let us run with endurance the race set before us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, … so that you may not grow weary and lose heart.” This text was a modified form of Hebrews 12:1-3. It was chosen both to fit the theme and reflect our Christian perspective.

All was well for months. The children went on with their art work. Then came the news that there was a problem with the artwork and some of it would need to be remade. This was at first put forward under the guise that the artwork had been damaged. We met with the artist to begin work on the parts that we could use. At that meeting, she announced that the name of “Jesus” had to go!

First, condemnation belongs to the council for their decision but also for their utter cowardice. They did not have the intestinal fortitude to turn up and speak to us in person. When we finally arranged a meeting, we were stone-walled. The decision was made; no correspondence would be entered in to. They launched a war on Jesus and then hid in their bunker.

Second, note the war on Jesus. It is reminiscent of what the early Apostles endured – “let us warn them to speak no more to any man in this name” (Acts 4:17). We could have substituted Jesus name for something nebulous, such as creator, Supreme Being or God. In other words, we could have only that which was interpretable and which would be open to the majority of peoples and beliefs.

Third, and I believe in my heart that this was the greatest tragedy, I was the only one there that day that walked away from the project. All the others were willing to give up the name of Jesus to appease the Statist master and ultimately to ‘slip beneath the radar’. Please do not read this as a pat on the back for self. It is not. It is a heartfelt cry that Christians, of various denominations, would so easily give up the name of Jesus for peace — and we are talking a name on a table! What then are the Christians going to do when confronted with the barrel of a gun, deprivation, or incarceration?

Case 2. Foolishly, after the above incident, I went to work for said council. Never have I worked in such a godless place, but that is another topic. During my time, Big Brother invited me, against my will, to attend a seminar on Human Rights. What I learnt at that seminar was that the government has no respect for so called “Human Rights”. I objected to going to this meeting, but I was informed that it was compulsory. The State Government had amended legislation making it compulsory for all Local Government workers to be ‘brainwashed’ into believing the Humanistic nonsense entitled “Human Rights”.

At that time, my big boss, belonged to the Congregation of Rome. So I appealed to him. ‘This is nonsense. It cuts across what you and I believe. So why should we have to go?’ Answer: I do not want to go either, but it is compulsory!

The lesson should be obvious. We mentioned above that there is a certain rewrite of “Discrimination” legislation waiting in the wings. How is it that the same government that is out to quash discrimination, actively discriminates? How is it that the government pushing “Human Rights”, can trample all over my rights to establish theirs?

Having read parts of this draft legislation, it makes me laugh – muffled because it is serious. Have a guess at who is exempt from prosecution under this legislation? The Crown! So the Crown can discriminate without fear whilst telling others they are not to discriminate. (1:15 – The Crown is bound by the legislation but cannot be prosecuted for an offence.) You would probably also enjoy 2:21, “Special measures to achieve equality are not discrimination”. Now, it may be just me and my paranoia, but that sounds suspiciously like ‘enforced group therapy to bring about homogenous “line towing”’ is not to be considered as discrimination. Could this explain why I was compulsorily invited to attend a Human Rights seminar?

Case 3. Recently, I had a chat with a friend regarding the name of an author. I asked if he knew this person. He responded by saying, “Yes. It is me!” (Forgive the vagueness, but I wish to protect him.) Naturally, I sought an explanation for the nom de plume. It was fairly succinct. He had obtained a job in a department that wants its employees to ‘be seen to be neutral’. So it was suggested that any forays into the public arena, particularly with strongly held – and I am guessing, running contrary to the party line – opinions, were best expressed under an assumed name.

Let me be clear. I am not saying that my friend was the only one who received this advice. I am merely highlighting the fact that “he did” receive this advice.

The real point is this: Do you think that this department is governed by existing anti-discrimination legislation? I would think so. Therefore, regardless of who the employee is, such advice should not be given, it is, in fact, illegal to put forward such a suggestion, especially by a department of this type.

Again, we focus on the State’s utter hypocrisy. The State busies itself preparing legislation that is meant to bring about equality and the freedom of the individual, but then tells individuals that they cannot express certain sentiments or, if they do, they should do it under another name. It is this second aspect that is important.

The State’s anti-discrimination legislation is nothing less than a postmodern denial of truth. The theory posits that there are no absolutes, especially when it comes to epistemology. Consequently, it is asserted that the subjective opinion of each and every man is equally valid. This is what anti-discrimination legislation seeks to protect. In itself this legislation is a philosophic oxymoron, for this legislation seeks to make an absolute for governing the subjective and in so doing proposes something contradictory to its own presupposition, namely that absolutes do not exist! It is therefore a logical fallacy. However, I digress.

Having asserted that every opinion is valid, the government then legislates to force everyone to accept their nonsense position. In order to be seen to operate within the bounds of their own laws, the government does not forbid, in most cases, its employees to speak in the public square. Hence, the second piece of advice – change your name if you do! It would be obvious to all that the government was being inconsistent if it forbade people to speak, to express their subjective non-absolutes on a particular topic. However, having adopted the untenable position that they have, the last thing the government wants is people pulling their straw man apart; especially people on their payroll who can be traced back to the inner sanctum.

What is all important here is the guise! You see the government would prefer you not to be a Christian – because those odd people who believe in absolutes and objective truth are a darn spanner in the works! However, their plan “B” is to manipulate people into appearing and acting as though all operate on the same basis. It is akin to Mrs Bucket in “Keeping up Appearances.” You smooth the pronunciation of “bucket” with a French touch so that it sounds more like “bouquet” and you sit beside the phone waiting for the Queen to phone. Yet all the time you are just a commoner whose name is “bucket”. In other words, whilst the State would be happy for you to abandon your Christian belief, and this is their ultimate goal, they will settle, in the short term, for your acquiescence to their ideals (playing by their rules) and a desertion of any overt statements on your part. Therefore, hand-in-hand with their anti-discrimination legislation comes legislation that makes it illegal for you to express your supposed subjective opinions anywhere outside of your house or place of worship.

Case 4. Harking back to my foolishness in going to work for the local council, I must confess that I nearly did not. After going through the interview process and being offered the position, I received my employment contract. In that contract was a clause that stated that whilst employed by Council I could make no negative comments in the media concerning Council. I could understand the clause that said that I was not authorised to speak to the media on behalf of Council. However, this clause was different. It took away my right as a citizen to express my views in the public square, at least on certain issues. Remember, this is the same organisation that made me go to a “Human Rights” seminar whilst trampling on my supposed ‘rights’ multiple times.

Conclusion:

Having meandered through a few topics, it is time to pull them all together.

We are in a cultural war. That war is reality because of our government’s insistence on continued rebellion against God. Romans 13 clearly shows that government is a minister of God and that it is to be a righteous instrument in His hand. However, like man, it is fallen. It will be used rightly by righteous people or it will be used wrongly by those who are evil and misguided. At present, government, nationwide, is under the management of usurpers and God haters. Even where Christians exist, they seem reluctant to make a stand or incapable of putting forward solid arguments for change.

Therefore, we are constantly bombarded with legislation, policy, and directives that push us further from God’s grace and unto His wrath and judgement.

Much of this has happened because of the Christians acquiescence, for one reason or another, to the Statist’s demands. In saying this, I do not stand on the moral high ground. I have used my own poor example of how easily we can be lured into compromise. It is also worth noting that some of this is subtle. I applied for a job as a “garbo”. I simply did not expect the employment contract to contain some of the things it did. To me they were relevant because I write on social issues. To most, it would have been irrelevant. The point is, nonetheless, that it was there and people, of all beliefs, signed up to it. This Council employed over 300 people. That means that over 300 people agreed to be silent on certain issues. It means that 300 people decided “not to bite the hand that feeds” no matter what errors they encountered.

You see my friends, this is how the Statist master forces, coerces, and deceives. None of us took on a position because we were desperate to be gagged. Yet, that is essentially what happened. Despite all the various types of legislation that exist; despite all the militant lawyers looking for the big win and headlines, clauses like this are written in to contracts all the time and people, wittingly or otherwise, sign up to them.

I mentioned earlier that policies like these have a total cultural impact. Some may query this. Let’s follow this example. 300 odd people signed up to employment on the basis of not speaking against Council. This meant that, in essence, 300 inside and informed perspectives were denied to the wider community. Equally, those same 300 people were “made” to attend a “Human Rights” seminar. Thus, these 300 were abused over and over. Having been employed by Local Government, they became the government’s drones. They were denied the right to speak. They were forced to attend seminars that denied them basic rights – after all, a child can be exempt from religious instruction on the request of a parent, but we were denied that option.

Then think about those 300 people. Most had families. How did all these policies influence those wider families? Is it possible that dad does not be a proper dad now because he is trying to respect the “rights and dignity” of his 3 year old as defined by Humanism? Does mum no longer abide her place as her husband’s helpmeet because she has “rights” and is entitled to express them?

Then we must ask, “What of all the other Local Governments whose employees were also forced into these seminars?” How many do they number? The answer to that is hidden in the fact that there are over 70 Councils in Victoria all of whose employees would have been required to attend seminars similar to the one mentioned. If we allow an average of 100 employees per council, we arrive at a number of around 7000.

Then we can think of the other levels of Government. How many employees in State and Federal governments are subjected to this tyranny? Well, according to the world of Wiki, there were over 160,000 people employed under the Public Service Act 1999 for the 09-10 financial year. That figure really only accounts for the Federal Government. We could go on, but I believe that you understand my point. Thousands of people across this nation are being constrained to attend propaganda seminars run by our governments to reinforce their agenda. These operations must have an impact on our culture. Even if only 10% of these people leave those meetings convinced, it is 10% fewer that have to be convinced. It is 10% that will now operate according to and regurgitate the State’s position.

In order to drive this point home, I would like to raise two illustrations. The first is more relevant to the more mature – the polite term for aged. Those of us who were around before the “wall” fell will remember the horror with which the former Russia was described. We would revile in an instant when we were confronted with the forced indoctrination of the Soviet peoples. We saw a culture disintegrate before our eyes because the Socialist monster had denied generations the right to think or express anything but that which the State had approved. Jails were filled with people whose only crime was to speak out against the establishment or to hold an opinion that was deemed contrary to the State. I ask you, “Can you not see the parallels between the Russia of old and what is being realised before your eyes in your own country?”

The second illustration came from a mission organisation. They showed a film on Christians in Egypt. It explained how these Christians were free to worship God in Jesus and to teach their religion, but only within the bounds of the Church building. These people could not move outside their church building and say anything. To do so would bring swift condemnation. In watching this, the tragedy was that so many Christians immediately felt sympathy for these people; they were incensed at the injustice; yet it did not seem to gel with them that we are experiencing these very same laws here in Australia. It is already illegal in some parts of this country to make statements on certain topics outside of the church building. How long will these exemptions apply? How long will it be before our sermons and worship need to be approved by the State censor?

Many will scorn in answering these questions. Labels will be appended, and so on. However, none of that alters the evidence. Name calling does not dismiss the proof that is before our eyes.

These actions on the part of the government will only be stopped when Christians draw the line in the sand. We, for the most part, are the only ones who can see clearly in order to understand and repudiate the false claims of the State. This is not magic. It is the consequence of a redeemed mind and will (Romans 12:1-2). It is what happens when Jesus claims a life as His and, removing the veil of death and sin, makes a person truly alive (Romans 6:12-14). Consequently, like Ezekiel the watchmen, we must stand on the cultural parapet and cry out to our countrymen (Ezekiel 33:1-9). Sadly, it seems to me, the watchman is asleep.

If the Christians will not draw the line in the sand, who will? If the Christians truly believe that Jesus Christ is the only Son of God and the only way of Salvation, when will they begin to resist all demands both to compromise this message and the way of life by which it is proclaimed? If government, like man and the Church, were made and instituted for the glory of God alone, when will the Christians begin to demand that the government serve God through Jesus Christ (Romans 13-1 & 6)? The line in the sand must be draw.

Let me go one step further. The line in the sand has been draw. It was draw a long time ago. It was drawn by the finger of God. The reason it is no longer visible is because the enemies of God have long transgressed that boundary and God’s warriors, the Church and the Christian, have done little to repel such incursions. Explaining it this way may help the Christians of this nation to see that it is not simply enough to assume God’s authority, draw a new line, and make peace with those that oppose God and His Christ. No. Our job is nothing other than to oust the enemy and push them back to God’s line of demarcation.

I call upon you now to draw a line in the sand and shout “Enough!”, but not in defiance of God or as a usurper of His authority. Rather, the call is in terms of a covenant and a testimony before God that our compromise and sin has been great and that this day, in full repentance, we begin to push back. May this line serve one purpose only; that of being a testimony to our compromise and a constant reminder of our need to push the enemy back to God’s line of demarcation (Joshua 4:1-7). We should look over our shoulder daily to see this new line disappear out of sight. We should look forward every day to see God’s line looming large in our sight.

Brethren, let us draws this line as a sign of our repentance and as a symbol of our dedication to God and His statutes, revealed in Jesus Christ, wriiten down and brought to remembrance through the Holy Spirit. Let us, in the Name of Jesus Christ, show our love and dedication to our God in Trinity and take back our Father’s world.

1. For example, If that law promotes evil; the opposite effect is that it must diminish righteousness. Although we are focussing on government, the same is true of the Church. If the Church preaches error, the opposite reaction is that it diminishes righteousness. If the Church preaches righteousness, the opposit effect is that evil diminishes.

Of Purity and Leaven

Posted on November 22, 2012 by Murray McLeod-Boyle

Most are aware of the Puritans. We know them as an historic bunch of nit-pickers who simply could not get out of their own road to enjoy themselves. We have even developed the label – Puritanical – to describe anyone who is a religiously strict kill-joy or, in Australian parlance, a wowser! If you believe this summary, I am afraid you have been duped. The Puritans were religiously strict, but they also knew how to enjoy life. They drank fermented beverages. Given the size of some of their families, they were no strangers to “horizontal relaxation” or ‘the midnight cuddle’. The purpose and goal of their lives was summed up in their name – they desired covenantal purity in the eyes of God. Their lives were to be offered as fragrant sacrifices to God and, as such, had to be pure in order to be accepted. It is sad that Christians today do not see the need for purity in their lives, especially when their lives should be conceived of as an offering to God.

The Bible is very clear on the need for purity. Matthew 5:8, James 1:27, 1 Peter 2:2, and 1 John 3:1-3, to name but a few texts, all have something particular to say about the Christian’s need for purity. The opposite of the pure life is the leavened life. Let us then look at the Biblical principle of ‘the leaven’.

First, we must avoid the mistake of limiting the Bible’s teaching on leaven to a mere maxim, such as, ‘a little can affect a lot’. Whilst this concept is present, it by no means does justice to the teaching of Scripture. Second, we must see that any elaboration of this principle in Scripture is always negative. Third, the Scripture’s teaching is always aimed at the child of God. Fourth, the application of this teaching means one thing: the Christian is to be pure.

The search for wisdom must begin with God. What does God think of leaven? He despises it! This may need some modification, but it will do for now. Consider the institution of the Passover. At this juncture, Yahweh gives basic, yet explicit, instruction in regard to leaven. None is permitted (Exodus 12:15-19)! The Israelites are to do without leaven for seven days. It is to be absolutely excluded. Understand that this is no trifle. It is not simply the case that God prefers His bread flat. The concept of leaven is intricately tied to the concept of salvation. Note well the penalty for anyone found with leaven. They are to be “cut off from the congregation of Israel”. To be “cut off” means nothing less than to be severed from the covenant people and therefore from salvation itself. The seriousness of the ‘leaven principle’ is underscored when the Israelites are instructed to never burn leavened bread (Leviticus 2:11). The grain offering is most holy and it is to be food for the priest and to be consumed in a holy place (Leviticus 6:17). It must be offered unleavened. Consequently, leaven must never ascend to the nostrils of God as a “soothing aroma”.

Why is this? It seems that we could learn a lesson from the Hebrew word for leaven. The term primarily means ‘to be / make sour’. It shares the same consonantal root as the term for vinegar. Understood in this way, we must see that the addition of leaven is a contamination which sours the bread and lessens its quality. Let us underscore the severity with which God views this contamination by stating quite clearly, again, that no leaven was ever to appear on Yahweh’s altar. The Israelite could only offer leavened bread as a “first fruit” and a “wave offering” (Leviticus 23:17).

This negative concept of leaven is carried through into the New Testament. At every point where the principle of leaven is elaborated upon, it carries with it a negative connotation, either explicitly or implied. In Matthew 16:6-12, Jesus warns His disciples to be alert for the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees, which is described as leaven. In Luke 12:1, Jesus describes the Pharisaic leaven as hypocrisy. Mark 8:15 is interesting. There, Jesus warns of the leaven both of the Pharisees and Herod. It is almost as though the Holy Spirit gives warning against imbibing corrupt ideas from authorities, ecclesiastic or secular. Turning from the Gospels to the Apostle Paul, we see that the same negative overtones are affirmed. In 1 Corinthians 5:6 and Galatians 5:9, Paul uses the phrase, “a little leaven leavens the whole lump.” This would show that the phrase was an idiom; however, this does not detract from its importance. In these passages, Paul equates leaven with arrogance, the corrupted old self, depravity, wickedness, and the necessity of circumcision. One reference, however, stands out above the rest.

In 1 Corinthians 5:7-8, Paul gives instruction to clean out the old leaven. In other words, it is time to wash the bowl and start again from scratch. It is time to remove all the old impurities. As Paul metaphorically throws the new lump of dough into the bowl, he calls a halt to proceedings. ‘No leaven required, thank you!’ We are unleavened bread. We are the redeemed of the covenant. We are the offering laid upon the altar of God, ascending as a pleasing aroma (1 Peter 2:4-5). We are holy. Not only do we not need leaven, to add leaven would be almost blasphemous. It would mean that we are not fit for the altar of God and as a pleasing aroma. It means that we would be “cut off” from the congregation of Israel for being in possession of leaven. Do we make too much of this. No. Paul himself makes direct reference in this verse to Jesus as “our Passover”. The Passover meal was accompanied by the unleavened bread. Jesus our Passover has been sacrificed. The unleavened bread must accompany the Lamb. We are to be unleavened loaves of “sincerity and truth.” Salvation and worship are inextricably linked in Scripture. The saved must worship and their worship must be acceptable, that is, offered in purity according to God’s standard; just as our Passover Lamb was pure and unblemished. The Apostle John tells us that the Father seeks worshippers who will worship in “spirit and truth” – worship after the essence of God (Spirit) and the nature of God (Truth).

The importance of the Christian being essentially pure is underscored when we develop this principle further by introducing Jesus’ words from Mathew 13:33. There, Jesus tells us that the Kingdom of Heaven ‘is like a woman who places leaven into a quantity of flour and then waits until all is leavened.’ Do we have a contradiction here? Not at all! Strictly speaking, Jesus’ words should not be considered as part of the ‘principle of leaven’ because there is no elaboration. In other words, there is no, “beware of …”, in which the detrimental nature of the leaven is explained or implied (Something most definitely present in the other references). In this section of Scripture, Jesus gives different parables in order to describe the Kingdom of God. In Matthew 13:33 (and the parallel in Luke13:21) Jesus uses the concept of the leaven to illustrate how the Kingdom of God must of necessity impact upon all with which it comes in contact. Note that the Kingdom is not leaven, it is like leaven. It cannot help but modify or impact upon all that it touches for that is its very transformational and redemptive nature. The Kingdom is positive in its impact precisely because it is pure and a purifier. The Kingdom purifies the corrupt. The Kingdom sheds light in the midst of darkness. The Kingdom gives life to the dead. As stated, the Kingdom is pure and transformational. Therefore, nothing needs to be added to the Kingdom. It is God’s perfective work, reclaiming all that is His through the shed blood of Jesus Christ, culminating in Yahweh’s perfect worship. The Kingdom can be compared to the action of the leaven, but it is by no means leaven!

The comparison of Jesus’ words in Matthew 13:33 with those which speak of the ‘principle of the leaven’, cannot but make us realise why leaven is forbidden to the Christian and why the Christian is essentially pure. The people of God, regenerate through the washing of Jesus’ blood, are pure Kingdom participants, whose lives, in totality, must culminate in the pure worship of God. As such, the Christian needs no leaven. The introduction of any leaven is forbidden because it corrupts the purity that is acceptable to God. Hence, the Christian is consistently warned to be on guard and to watch out for any leaven; that which is a corruption, perversion, or travesty of God. We must see that the leaven that the Christian is warned about is any ideology, philosophy, theory, or concept that is in opposition to the purity of God and His Christ. In short, the Christian is warned regarding the ideas of the “world” and the complete and utter unworthiness of their presence in the Christian as a new creature in Christ, a living sacrifice, and a fragrant aroma (2 Corinthians 2:14-17; Philippians 4:18). The Christian, as a Kingdom of God participant, is to be a vivacious force for life and purity, bringing the redemptive purposes of God to the fore in themselves and in every encounter with the world.

God is Pure. The Kingdom is Pure. The Kingdom participant must likewise be Pure. ‘No leaven, please, we’re Christ’s!’ (2 Corinthians 11:1-3.)

PostTenebrasLux

The Dominion of Jesus Christ is Light: The path of the righteous is like the light of dawn! Proverbs 4:18

Category Archives: Reform

AA