URGENT - Please email your MLCs

As you may be aware the upper house of the Victorian Parliament is debating/voting this week on the decriminalisation of abortion. This bill will mean that a woman can have an abortion for no reason up until 24 weeks, and up to 40 weeks with 2 doctors support. This bill will also mean that doctors that have a moral objection to performing abortions MUST refer women onto doctors who they know will perform the abortion. This means that the doctor is forced by law to act against their conscience. Even if one does not object to abortion, forcing people to act against their conscience is a serious erosion of democratic freedom.

If you haven't already, could you please email the Members of the Legislative Council for your region ASAP asking them to vote against the bill. The bill will probably be voted on on WEDNESDAY, so we need to email before then. From what we heard at the rally on Sunday there are still members who are undecided. This bill is subject to a conscience vote, so each member will be voting as they desire, not necessarily along party lines. So even if they are in the liberal party which normally takes a conservative view on morality issues, they MAY NOT vote against the bill.

Please be praying that the Holy Spirit will convict the consciences of those who are unsure about whether to vote for/against this bill, that He will convict them that what this bill is doing is legalising the murder of the most vulnerable members of our society, those who do not have a voice. Please pray that those who have decided to vote against the bill will hold onto their convictions and not be swayed by the pro-choice lobby.

God bless,
Bec

Sex is NOT a toy!

The following report from the Age details some of the effects of not allowing children to have their innocence, by bringing them up in a society with views on sexualisation that are based on the perverted desires of adults rather than the good of children:

http://www.theage.com.au/national/children-involved-in-sex-club-20080913-4ft4.html

If children are not allowed time to grow up and mature before they are confronted with (a) information about sex (b) images of a sexualised/pornographied nature then it is no surprise that they become sexually aggressive and/or promiscuous. After all they are children, and if they try to force other children to give them toys by force, then why on earth wouldn't they use the same methods to procure sexual favours?????

We need to protect children from being prematurely exposed to both information about sex, and more particularly images that will form their views on what the sex act should look like. If their primary views on sex are formed by sexualised/porn images then they will likely not see sex as a loving thing (between a husband and wife-God forbid), since the images so often portray one party (usually the woman) in servitude to the other, and that's when there's only two people involved. They will also not be able to distinguish lust from love, and that lays a foundation for devastation and destruction in their lives. If we do not do something about this now, the next generation will likely never experience true intimacy which can only be experienced in the context of marriage, and many many more will fall victim to relationship breakdown and the devastation that accompanies that.

Sex is NOT a toy, a truth that adults need to model for children, rather than pandering to their own childish desires, damn the consequences.

God bless,
Bec

Dancing with the Stars needs to "put its knickers BACK on"

Last night's season opener of Dancing with the Stars was very disappointing. There was an overwhelming amount of sexualised content, and this is particularly inappropriate considering the 7:30 time slot when children may be watching.

By the end of the third dance we had:

• Daniel McPherson touching Sonia's leg
• Bruno saying he couldn't keep his eyes off Sonia
• The female dancers wearing hardly anything
• Mark arkwardly attempting to get in on the sexualisation by referring to the dancers as "sexy"
• Todd McKenny telling a dancer to take her knickers off

And if that wasn't enough, to top it off there was that move where the Sunrise reporter ran his hand between his partner's breasts. The comments that followed about that 18 year old dancer and the sexual tension between her and her partner were unnecessary.

Dancing with the stars needs to "put its knickers back on". The objectification of women is not appropriate at 7:30 or indeed in any timeslot. The objectification of women is a form of slavery. We are not here simply for the sexual delight of men.

We may be "liberated" so that we can join the workforce but while we allow men to treat us as sexual objects that exist for the sole purpose of appeasing their sexual appetites we have gained nothing. We have simply exchanged one form of slavery (house slavery) for three others (wage slavery, debt slavery and sexual slavery). We need to be vigilant about the views on women that we allow to be part of our society. This is having, and will have an enormous effect on the next generation. Girls need freedom and space to grow up not measuring themselves by how sexually attractive men find them, but instead by discovering WHO they really are, and their value in who they are, not in their:

• Dress size
• Breast size
• Blondeness
• Use of brazillian waxing services
• Skimpiness of clothing

Our western culture has become completely debauched. It is time that we started treating each other with respect and dignity, and the pornification of our society has robbed us of that. There is nothing glamorous about gadding about with nothing on and having men lust after you as an object. Being the trash-can for a man's excess bodily fluids is demeaning. There is no honour or respect in it. It is not a reflection of a woman's worth or place in the world. She is beautiful and she is loved, because she was MADE BY GOD to be an object of His love (with her CLOTHES ON).

You might of picked up that I am angry. Well I am. I am fed up with this sick and twisted culture where women are pushed into conforming to an image to please men (the porn image). Where we are told that being sexually loose is freedom although it is really slavery. We conform to this because we want to be loved. When we do conform to that porn image that feeds men's weakness and creates a culture that is just as toxic and crippling for them as it is for us. It's a cycle because as much as a women conforms to that image it doesn't make men love her, they despise her, so she continues to change herself more and more. She doesn't accept that she is made in the image of God, and that the purpose of her life is to be conformed into the image of Christ, not that of Aphrodite/Venus. And men are never happy either, as much as they pursue those women that conform to the image they desire they are never truly satisfied. If they were they wouldn't need to move on to the next girl and the next girl and the next girl.

It's time to tear down our idols. Only Christ can truly satisfy.

God bless,
Bec

No spine whatsoever

OK I take it back, the archbishop of Canterbury has no theological or moral spine whatsover:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article4473814.ece

The Anglican church is quite clearly on the death march to hell if it follows this mans leadership.

God bless,
Bec

So the Archbishop of Canterbury does have a spine

It appears that the Archbishop of Canterbury does have a spine, and a moral compass!

http://www.theage.com.au/world/american-churches-blamed-for-anglican-rift-20080804-3px1.html?page=-1

It is a good thing that he has stopped pandering to the liberal faction of the Anglican church and has finally called a spade a spade; yes there are divisions in the Anglican church and those divisions were caused by the US & Canadian bishops who have gone against the word of God, and the beliefs and traditions of Anglicanism.

God bless,
Bec

Unborn Slaves

This is a must read: http://www.theage.com.au/national/women-tricked-into-selling-unborn-into-slavery-20080804-3pyt.html?page=-1

God bless,
Bec

And there's more...

I've been writing a lot about the sexual depravity of our society this week. I thought the series of three would be the end (although I never imagined there would be a "series"), but there is more in the paper today. I have been following with some interest over the last few days the results of the government's investigation of the sexualisation of children.

One would have hoped that the government investigation would come back with some constructive recommendations to ensure that the media and marketers targetting children would be held to some standards regarding sexual content. However instead the investigation has come back and said that the media's self regulation is working well, and that it is really just the parents responsibility to monitor what their kids are watching.

That is insanely naive and selfish. No child is under their parents' 100% supervision and control 100% of the time. Bringing up kids is something that parents need to do in partnership with society. There are regulations around swimming pool fencing, because we already as a society recognise to a certain extent that parents can't watch their kids all of the time. And so we regulate to make the environment safe, so that together with parental supervision children are kept as safe as possible.

The impact of sexualised/pornographic images on young minds is as dangerous to young minds, as drowning is to young bodies. If children see these images before their parents have been able to explain sexuality to them in ways conducive to healthy development, then they have no frame of reference for filtering and making judgements on whether what they are seeing is appropriate.

The major argument behind not doing anything about removing sexualised/pornographic images from places where children might see them seems to be the "infringement" of adults so-called "right" to self expression. There seems to be a liberal contigent that just wants to do what they want to do, no matter who it hurts. There seems to have been a shift from the "I'm not hurting anybody" argument to the "who the hell cares who I am hurting, I'm having fun" as an attitude towards so-called "adult entertainment". This is the heights of selfishness.

I recently heard a speaker say that sexual abuse for children isn't just where they have been molested, but that exposure to sexualised/pornographic images has the same kind of impact on children. Yet of course, as a society we don't think it's as bad, especially if it was an "accidental" exposure, but the impact is as devastating. Before they have the capacity to understand what good God-given, marital sexuality looks like, their attitudes and understanding of sex is twisted into the warped mindset of the porn industry and its bedfellows. The thing about sexualised images that are targetted at children is that it's more insidious than direct abuse, a much larger number of children will have been impacted by that, than by direct abuse.

As our society continues to decline into all out sexual debauchery, the problem is only going to get worse. The devastation to the post-internet generations will be epidemic. This is why we have to fight every step of the way to make our society a safe place for children to grow up, letting them be kids, and not forcing them to deal with adult issues before they are pyschologically and spiritually ready. We also need to resource and train parents on how to talk to their children about sexuality, in a way that will lead to healthy marriages in their childrens' futures.

One of the difficulties in the Australian context is that we tend to be quite politically apathetic. As Christians I think we need to start getting really good at engaging with our political system to bring a prophetic voice to bear. If we do not proclaim God's will in this kind of situation then nobody else will. I'd urge you, find out who your local MP is both federally and state, and when issues like this come up, or the abortion and euthanasia ones in Victoria at the moment, write to your MP. Each letter/email they receive they view as representing the view of 100 people. We can make an impact by engaging in our political system.

God bless,
Bec

Slippery Slide

This seems to be the week for everyone who doesn't like monogamous heterosexual sex within marriage to come out in arms proposing their particular brand of perversion. First it was the "bad boys are more successful in relationships" thing, then it was the robot love thing, recently it was the change of laws in Calfornia to allow gay marriages, and now??

Well in what could seem like a surprising step of logic from gay marriage (which presumably is abhorent to Muslims as well as Christians), muslims in America are arguing that because of the principle behind the Calfornia ruling that the same rights should be extended to muslims who wish to have polygamous marriages.

Well I hear you say, one could expect that in America. Not only in America, today's Age reports that muslims in Australia are also pushing for the recognition of polygamous marriage. Laughably, they are arguing it on behalf of the rights of women, I could go on endlessly about the complete lunacy of the position that says muslim polygamous marriages is for the protection of women. It is quite obviously NOT about the women, but entirely about the lust of men that they refuse to take responsibility for controlling. As I said I could go on and on, but Bill Muehlenberg has done that already admirably on his blog today.

The point I would really like to make is that the minute you start relaxing the definition of marriage for one group, then you have to start relaxing it for every group. Mark my words, within 50 years there will be a strong and outspoken lobby promoting paedophilia as a "valid lifestyle" and seeking to gain legal protection for adult-child "unions". And what those that engage in bestiality? Should not their animal "partners" be accorded the same legal rights as a human partner?? Especially if they are in a long-term committed relationship! And what about necrophiles?? What legal rights should their "relationships" be accorded??

To quote Star Trek First Contact, "We've made too many compromises already; too many retreats. They invade our space, and we fall back. They assimilate entire worlds, and we fall back. Not again. The line must be drawn here! This far, no further!"

And the line is this, sex was made, by God to be enjoyed by one man and one woman, once that man and that woman have made a lifelong covenant of unconditional love to one another, in the sight of God.

God bless,
Bec

Robot love???

I just read an article that I wish wasn't serious - http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/bscienceb-boffins-tip-robothuman-love-within-40-years/2008/06/20/1213770916042.html - a presumably very lonely scientist is predicting that there will be robots that humans can have relationships with within 40 years.

Given that our society already is fractured, and self-absorbed, such that real relationships are harder and harder to come by, I think this will cause many many many more problems than it will solve.

It's like the whole Wii Fit thing. In the olden days, kids used to play outside and so were healthy from getting exercise. Then we invented computer games and television, so that modern kids spend so much more time inside and thus are not getting exercise, and are getting fat. So the solution??? Let's invent an attachment for our computer game systems so that kids get exercise WHILE playing computer games. Is it just me or is the more obvious, healthy and affordable option TO SEND THEM OUTSIDE TO PLAY!!

This Robot love thing strikes me the same way. There used to be a higher rate of marriage, there used to be a higher rate of marriages THAT LASTED. Since the 60s with the so-called "free love" movement, marriage and long term relationships have suffered. We've created a world where sexual expression is about what feels good to me, regardless of the relational impact. Our desire for sexual gratification is promoted as being more important than bringing sexual fulfilment to our partners. Suddenly, sex has become all about ME. Therefore it is no wonder that it is getting harder and harder to form good lasting relationships, because we've built a view on sex and relationships that they are all about MY fulfilment. It is hard to love someone, and give yourself to someone else, when your primary objective is your own satisfaction.

An example from the article, the scientist believes that such robots could be used within human-human relationships, for instance when one partner is travelling. The other partner might say, "Take your robot, I don't want you visiting the red light district". Seriously, if the ONLY options when travelling are sex with a robot or sex with a prostitute, then there are bigger problems in that relationship than whether or not robot-sex is appropriate. There should only be one option when away from one's spouse--abstinence!

This human-robot-love solution that this scientist thinks will solve these problems is just a bandaid on the problem. An icky and disturbing bandaid, but a bandaid none the less. This idea is like that of the Wii Fit -- let's not deal with the real issue, let's let the existing problem fester under what might seem on the surface to be a solution.

God bless,
Bec

Treat 'em mean, what nonsense!!

There's an article in today's Age about a correlation between men having traits of "impulsiveness, narcissism, thrill-seeking and deceitfulness" and them having a "prolific amount of sex". It further reasons that this makes "bad boys" more "successful" in relationships, indeed the article is entitled, "Treat 'em mean: it works".

http://www.theage.com.au/news/relationships/treat-em-mean-it-works/2008/06/18/1213468480771.html

The article then goes on to define this so-called success, as being more "active in short-term mating" than nice guys.

There are a number of issues with this article, the first obviously being the underlying assumption that "short-term mating" is the goal of all men, therefore the definition of success in relationships. It is not accounting at all for a group of men (let's call them "nice guys") who actually want a long-term monogamous (god-forbid MARITAL) relationship with a woman. For that kind of man, the "nice guy", casual sex would NOT be the definition of relationship success, finding someone to settle down with WOULD. If a "nice guy" is not seeking casual sex, that would also be a contributing factor to them not having as many casual encounters. It stands to reason that if a guy isn't seeking casual sex, he won't have casual sex. It further stands to reason, that the "bad boy" who is defined as "impulsive, narcissistic, thrill-seeking and deceitful" and who IS seeking casual sex, would therefore have more casual sex. The big issue here is that they are comparing apples with oranges, both in terms of type of guy, and also in terms of each type's goal with regards to women.

The second issue with this article I think, is that it does not make any social commentary on WHY women might be attracted to bad guys. The following I think are a number of reasons a woman would find such men attractive:

• They seem confident
• They are the kind of guys fathers hate
• The insistence with which they pursue women gives the impression that the woman is highly desired, which leads to woman thinking "they really love me", which is a woman's deepest emotional desire, to be loved and cherished.
• Alternately, the woman believes she isn't worth loving, and so this is as good as it gets
• She thinks they "need her" because they are obviously broken people (and since no one will ever "want her" she has to settle for someone who needs her if she's going to be with anyone at all)
• She thinks she can "fix them" and they will become a nice guy

So basically, it comes out of a bunch of a woman's own issues; rebelliousness and low self-esteem being the two key ones. My point is this - the kind of women who go for this kind of man are not emotionally stable themselves.

Once you start to deal with issues of rebelliousness and self-esteem and find that you don't need to rebel against anyone to be independent/your own self, and accept yourself for who you are, those bad guys cease to be attractive.

Knowing Jesus really helps with this :-) He has a way of wooing a woman to a place where she realises she must have great value for the Son of God to die for her! Suddenly instead, it's the guy who knows his bible, who is prolific in prayer, who will make a great father, and who is gentle and considerate that is unbelievably attractive. It's the man that takes time to be friends with you and to build the basis of the relationship on a foundation of mutual respect and friendship that is the kind of guy that gets the girl.

God bless,
Bec

Purity, Celibacy, Chastity

Interestingly, I've noticed that the times I get the most hits on my blog is when I discuss adultery. I mentioned this to my Dad the other day, and he was like, "You are probably getting the porno traffic"... Hmmm... Somehow I think this discussion of purity, celibacy and chastity isn't going to register so high on the types of words people search for on google... ;-)

I read this earlier today and have been thinking about David's question about what purity is... I think in Christian circles the word 'purity' has become a synonym for 'celibacy'. The majority of its usage seems to be in discussing with particularly teenagers why they should save themselves for marriage. And in all honesty this discussion is probably surrounded with a fair amount of panic for those on the receiving end, it's the "ahh, man... that's like so harsh! what if I never marry, will I like die a VIRGIN". And that's even if it's not said.

However, I think maybe 'chastity' (monogamous sexual expression with our spouse (i.e. person of the opposite gender to whom we are married)) is a better synonym for purity. I think it's a lot more useful as a definition because it applies to unmarried and married people.

For unmarried people doesn't have the total "you can NEVER have sex, you will most probably die a virgin" connotations that celibacy has. It has lovely promise of future godly possibilities ala Song of Songs (why does nobody preach on SoS??? It'd kill the theology of anyone who reckons God made sex just for procreation or that God thinks sex is dirty etc).

For married people it's a reminder that marriage isn't a get-out-of-jail-free-card for lust. On the Stuff Christians Like blog I remember Jon mentioning with disgust the idea in the book "Every man's battle" that men should use their wives like methadone. His comment being, "if we're supposed to love our wives like Christ loved the church, did Christ ever get a 'fix' off the church?"

In defining chasity earlier, I used the term 'sexual expression' for want of a better phrase, to cover a multitude of thoughts/behaviours. (Much as the NT uses the greek 'porneia' to cover a multitude of sexual sins!) According to the sermon on the mount, the kind of faithfulness in regard to our sexuality that God calls us to in marriage, is that we do not even have lustful thoughts about people to whom we aren't married. So purity--chastity therefore, is total sexual faithfulness to our spouse; thought, word & deed.

WIthin the confines of marriage, have fun with each other, read Song of Songs in The Message if you need some hints... Yup it really does say that IN THE BIBLE...

God bless,
Bec

Child Sacrifice

I was reading Psalm 106 this morning. It's a record of God's faithfulness to Israel inspite of their unfaithfulness to Him. There are a couple of verses (37-38) that caught my attention in the middle:

They sacrificed their sons and their daughters to demons. They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was desecrated by their blood.

Child sacrifice is really a low-light of the Old Testament. The nations surrounding Israel and Judah practised it (see for example 2 Kings 3:27 where the King of Moab sacrificed his son), and many of the corrupt Kings of Israel and Judah also practised child sacrifice to various idols (see for example Ahaz in 2 Kings 16 and Manasseh in 2 Kings 21).

I think it is really easy for us to shake our heads and wonder how could they do this to their own children. I think it is really easy for us to think that we are better than they were, that we are a more civilised people and that we would never ever do anything like this.

But I think we have to stop and look at some of our modern practises and look at whether we too practise child sacrifice. The gods we sacrifice to may not have interesting Canaanite names like Baal or Asherah, but I think we do still have gods that we sacrifice our children to. They are called "convenience" or "a woman's right to choose", "no consequence casual sex" etc etc.

Abortion is the most obvious modern day example of child sacrifice within particularly the western world. We have made up excuses for why it's ok, but an unborn child is still just that-- an unborn child. In the first 10-12 weeks after conception, while they still weigh between 4 and 14 grams:

• The child's eyes have developed their colour
• Nearly all their organs have formed and are functioning
• Their fingers and toes have developed
• Their hair and nails have started to grow
• Their genitals are distinctively male/female
• The muscles in their intestinal walls have started to practise the contractions that will allow them to digest food
• Their vocal chords have begun to form
• Their liver starts to function
• The pancreas starts to produce insulin

There is some non-disturbing photos here and some rather disturbing ones here of murdered (aborted) children. Both show how early you can see that they really are human, they are not just "fetuses" or "lumps of tissue".

Abortion is modern day western child sacrifice. But I don't think it stops there. Forms of contraception that are potentially abortive also amount to child sacrifice. Barrier methods that prevent conception are ok, but those that act also in the event of conception to stop the child from implanting in the uterine wall amount to the same as abortion. This means the pill. The normal everyday pill as well as the so-called morning after pill. The normal pill works in two stages, it firstly tries to prevent conception by preventing ovulation. If this fails it uses a secondary method to prevent pregnancy -- and this is where the issue is. The secondary method is to thicken the mucus of the uterine wall so that the child cannot implant. This means that if a child is conceived they die. The morning after pill uses only the second method to prevent pregnancy.

In all of this, I do not mean to point fingers. I have in the past used the pill not knowing, or perhaps not wanting to know, the truth about it. My purpose in discussing this is just to draw attention to behaviours where we might hold one view when it's someone else doing it (i.e. condemning those in the bible who practised child sacrifice) and yet permit the same behaviour under another name, with some more modern reasons (excuses) behind it. I also want to draw attention to the fact that there are also parallels in the motivation. Whenever we do something outside of the will of God, that we think will make our lives better in some way, we are committing idolatry. We are saying that whatever it is that we are doing, will better serve our needs than God. We are placing (in this case) convenience, so-called women's "right to choose", "no consequence casual sex" in the place of Jesus, and sacrificing our children to those gods. When the Israelites practised child sacrifice it was to placate Baal or Asherah, we still sacrifice our children to idols-- the idols just have different names.

Let's return to Psalm 106. In all of this, despite our rebellion and sinfulness, God is still faithful. God still loves us, and there is forgiveness for those who repent. Jesus' death on the cross even deals with this sin of child sacrifice. There is real and total forgiveness, the bible says in Psalm 103:12, "as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us." This is not about condemnation, this is about renewing our minds, and seeing this from God's perspective. It's only when we do that that we have a chance to change our behaviour and our choices. Truth can be hard, and frankly I had a bit of an argument with God about writing this post because it is heavy and rather uncomfortable. But in Jesus truth comes hand-in-hand with GRACE.

God bless,
Bec

In the world but not of the world...

As Christians we are called to live out our lives in the midst of a culture that is predominantly antagonistic towards our beliefs. Often this antagonism is hidden and implicit rather than in your face, but however it manifests itself, the worldly culture is not the culture of the Kingdom of God. The most difficult part of this is that although we know that we are not supposed to live as the world lives, there is so much in the worldly culture that appeals to our sinful nature. So we are at war, not only against the outward influence of the world, but our own flesh's desire to be part of that world and partake of a myriad of sinful behaviours.

There is good sense in restricting ourselves from partaking in those external things that most appeal to our sinful nature to lead us into sin. For instance, if we have an abusive relationship with alcohol, then it is wise to not go to bars and lovingly hold glasses of scotch in our hands. Proverbs 5 talks about this in the context of adultery, "Keep to a path far from [the adulteress], do not go near the door of her house" (v8). Verses 3-4 are also instructive, "For the lips of an adulteress drip honey, and her speech is smoother than oil; but in the end she is bitter as gall, sharp as a double-edged sword." The things that are most dangerous to us are those that have the appearance of being good. Within this context it would further be an appropriate application to say that Christian people should avoid getting too close to non-Christian members of the opposite sex EVEN IF (and perhaps especially if) they think it is an opportunity to share the gospel. So many people's lives are shipwrecked on that doozy of a lie. They draw close to someone, emotionally invest, thinking they are just "loving as a brother/sister for Jesus' sake", and then end up in sin and walking away from God.

But we can take seperation from the world too far... There is a fascinating story in today's Age about a reclusive Jewish community in Melbourne, they go far far beyond the requirements of the Torah. In their zeal to maintain holiness they go so far as to segregate boys and girls from the age of 8. They do not use their wife's first name in public, only around their own children. They do not use the first name of other women to whom they are not married, to do so they see as the beginning of an illicit relationship. When the children are 16 they are sent overseas to seminary until they marry, at which point they are informed about sex and are then allowed to pursue secular university education and work. Men look at the ground as they walk, for fear of looking at a woman. Women dress conservatively, cover their hair (or shave it off once they are married, and wear wigs/scarves). They believe that, "if we want our children to uphold our religion the way we believe it, to the dot of the law, dress code etc, the only way is to isolate children from all outside influences".

This is so sadly mistaken, because the other side of this story is that the reason this group made the paper today, is that one of the female teachers in their segregated school has been accused of sexually abusing some of the girls. Now I know the atheist jihadists will see this as a vindication of their view that "fundamentalist" religion is the cause of all suffering. However, the truth is simply this, unfortunately, when we try to remove ourselves from influences that we think will corrupt us, we forget that sin comes with us into our segregated communities, because we have sinful natures! In the world or out of it, as long as people are there, before Christ returns, there will ALWAYS be sin issues.

OK, so having said that I still think there is a good argument for Christian schools, and other methods of living "not of the world". Particularly with children, it is scary how impressionable they are, and I think it doesn't matter which school you send them to all children will be indoctrinated. Every school will have a prevailing philosophy and agenda which it is trying to push. Recent comments from the federal Education Minister's advisor suggested that they saw Christian schools as subversive to the cohesion of society because Christian schools would not promote the secular "doctrines" of abortion, free sex and evolution that were necessary for the smooth operation of society. I think if I have the choice between my children being indoctrinated with the doctrines of abortion, free sex and evolution compared to grace, love, forgiveness, service, love, love, (did I mention love?) I'd choose the later everytime. I do not want my children growing up believing that sexual immorality is normal and appropriate. It isn't. It's enslaving (and I say that out of painful experience not just 'high ideals') and sinful, whether or not our society realises it.

For this same reason I am careful about what television I watch, because I am conscious of how much of an impact secular media has made on the way I think. Many of the strongholds and deceptive philosophies that I have fought against, and still fight against were formed in me through watching popular media. Based on the Romans 12:1-2 principle, "You are what you eat" (The Bec Paraphrase), I choose to abstain from junk food (worldly media) and eat healthy (bible, christian books/blogs, bible, bible, bible etc). I particularly don't watch things that promote/depict violence or sexual immorality. (For this reason, I am in NO hurry to watch Underbelly! ;-)) I also don't listen to secular music if I can avoid it, since so much of the content falls into the following categories, (a) idolatry of love; (b) idolatry of sex; (c) disrespect of women, authority etc. I am quite capable of coming up with enough sinful and rebellious thoughts on my own, I don't need any help with that!

In all honesty, I can see a point where this might make evangelism difficult. In not engaging the culture I live in, perhaps this makes relating to non-Christians more difficult. However, this hasn't been my experience to date. The times I clash most with non-Christians ideologically is over issues of trusting God versus doing things in my human strength, my relationship with money particularly has come up a number of times in this context. After all why does one need to worry and grasp after riches when we have a Father who graciously provides all that we need? I can't remember the last time I lost a conversation over whether or not I had seen such and such on telly, or whether or not I liked a certain song. In all honesty I've probably always been a bit different from "everyone else" anyway, I guess being different and seperate because of my Christianity mightn't feel that weird because I've always been an outsider. So if I'm going to be a weirdo, why not be a weirdo for Christ?

God bless,
Bec

The truth about abortion

If you have any doubts about abortion the following link speaks for itself:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/resources/photosbyage/index.htm

Don't view while eating. Kids shouldn't see it either.


God bless,
Bec

Selling Jesus

OK, I've been holding back on writing this because it seriously gets my goat, and I don't know how dispassionately I can discuss it, but here we go... I hate the way some churches go about evangelism. I hate how marketing principles have crept into drawing non-Christians into the church. I hate how getting people to church and to make a decision has become the point of evangelism.

Here are some of the bad reasons that church marketing uses get people to come to church:

• We have a great "worship experience"
• Jesus wants to make you happy
• Jesus wants to make you rich
• Jesus wants to make you fit & healthy
• Jesus wants to help you have the best sex ever

All these examples fall into two errors:

1. Conforming to the world by promoting the cult of Me
2. Selling Jesus on His "lifestyle benefits"

All these reasons are NOT about Christ but about people. It sends the message that church and Christianity is about us not about Christ. It does not matter to Jesus one bit how great the music is if it isn't centred on Him. He seeks those who worship "in spirit and in truth" not necessarily those who worship "in tune and in time". If it's about the "worshipper" and how much we enjoy the experience then we are seeking our own pleasure NOT worship of God. This is not worship of God but idolatry. I am not saying we are not allowed to enjoy worship, but the lights/smoke/volume/rockingness is secondary to the question of whether we have worshipped God in spirit & truth.

All the other reasons listed above, Jesus wants to make you happy, rich, healthy and for you to have great sex also fall into this trap of being about us rather than Christ. It is attempting to sell Jesus in exchange for money/health/sex. Jesus is not going to give us health, wealth, great sex in exchange for our love. The cross should be enough to gain our love as it is the ultimate sign of His love for us.

Does Jesus want good things for us? Yes, but ALL this is secondary to the truth of the gospel. People who teach these things as primary to the gospel are dancing dangerously close to Paul's definition of "false teachers" in 1 Tim 6, who preach that "godliness is a means to financial gain" (v5). I think Paul would be happy with my broadening the application to "godliness is a means to health, wealth and HOT sex!!"

All of this I think stems out of an unhealthily Arminian view of salvation. We need to remember predestination, those who are going to be saved are going to be saved, so we don't need to twist their arm. We need to "go" (NB. See the great commission, "go into the world" not "get them to come to church") and do a honest job of "witnessing" (NB. Interesting that the bible uses the word "witness" not "sell" or "market"). Yes the human will has a role in salvation, but to be a true convert you need not just to make a decision for Jesus, but you need to be predestined, called, regenerated, granted faith and repentence, justified before God and adopted into His family. All these things God does. If there is any role of our will in the process it's only because He enables us to do it, the decision is not a saving work!! (i.e. If making the decision saved us, it would be a work not grace that saves us).

Anything good that God does in our lives after salvation is as much pure grace as salvation itself. It is presumptuous to assume that He will do it, although it is in His character to give good gifts to His children. However it does not make a good basis for relationship, to love Him for what He can give us, rather than for who He is. I feel so strongly about this because I hate anything that seperates people from God, especially those things that have the appearance of bringing uscloser but in actual fact still divide. To try and trick people into coming to Jesus by manipulating them with their idols is sick. Idols do not lead people to Christ.

Nothing else in life is of any value in comparison to knowing Jesus. Even when that brings suffering and pain. Faith needs to be based on who Jesus is. If faith is based on the blessings of God, then if people do not "get what they signed up for" they will abandon the faith. Which is to say their faith was never IN Jesus to begin with, although they may have thought they were Christian because they prayed the sinner's prayer.

Just to finish on a bit of a lighter note, I found this vid on YouTube, talks about It's-all-about-Me worship:

God bless,
Bec

Weight Loss as a Parable for Spiritual Transformation

It often strikes me that weight loss is a great parable for spiritual transformation. There are three types of people who try to lose weight, and these parallel the ways we try to deal with sin:


1. Fad Dieter
These are the people who want a quick fix, they don't want to change their habits, and who see minimal change as a result. They want a miracle fix, that will help them lose lots of weight really really quickly. They really love weight loss products/plans that promise that they can continue to eat everything they are currently eating, and that they will still end up a size 8. Most usually this approach does not work. It is psychologically comforting, however, because if you are taking some "miracle weight loss pills" you can make the excuse that you "are trying", despair and return to your old ways with the comfort that it's not as though you didn't try, it's just that it's too hard.


2. Starvation Protest Dieter
The starvation dieter decides that it isn't really their fault that they are overweight, it's the food's fault. As a result, war is declared against all food. All food is evil, it is the enemy and must be stopped at all costs. They either refuse to eat at all, or go the way of the bulimic. This results in massive weight loss, but not only does fat get broken down, so does muscle. In time they become emaciated and die.


3. Change-in-Lifestyle Dieter
The dieters that have the most success are those that understand that food is NOT evil, food is not the problem. The problem lies in their relationship TO food. They simply over-indulge in something that is by nature GOOD. They seek to change their lifestyle so that their relationship with food and exercise is a healthy one. They seek advice from doctors and other health experts. They organise a support group, so that they are encouraged to keep going, particularly when things get difficult. They do what their personal trainer tells them to do even when it hurts or doesn't make sense. Instead of worrying about what they SHOULDN'T eat, they make sure that they ARE eating the right things. They don't buy problem foods, they buy lots of fresh fruit and veg. Once they've got the 5 veg, 2 fruit, meat, legumes etc etc thing down, there is less room for the higher fat foods. Over time they begin to enjoy more and more healthy food, and not having the higher fat foods all the time becomes less of an issue. Because life is meant to be fun, they do have the occasional slice of cake or tim-tam, but because they are now not eating them constantly, the effect on their waist line is negligle or non-existant, and they do not desire to eat more than a healthy portion.


I think weight loss illustrates the following spiritual transformation principles:

• Don't look for the latest fad or instant fix. Such change is unsustainable.
• Don't look for the "New Idea" / "Woman's Day" solution. Such solutions are unrealistic.
• Don't go on a starvation diet, cutting everything good out of life for fear that you may become corrupted by it. John 10:10, we are called to abundant life.
• Focus on what you SHOULD be eating rather than what you SHOULDN'T. If you fill up on "The Bread of Life" you won't have room for unhealthy "spiritual foods".
• Don't buy the "chocolate", if it isn't in the house, you can't eat it. Control the things you allow into your life that you know will later be a temptation. Win the battle at the "supermarket".
• Don't try to do it on your own, get help from 'experts' like mature Christians, elders, pastors etc. Have a support group in place, people who will remind you of God's grace, and support you in prayer.
• Follow your personal trainer's (Holy Spirit) instructions
• Don't kick yourself if you have the occasional tim-tam, God's grace is sufficient, get up have another go.
• Don't believe labels about yourself that define you in terms of your problem. You are not "Fat" or "a Loser" or "weak" because you struggle. Those labels are not from God. He labels you as "chosen", "redeemed", "accepted", "loved", "son/daughter of the King".

God bless,
Bec

Virtue vs. Innocence

I found the following quote a few months ago, I can't remember where, but it struck me at the time as being very insightful:

"There is a difference between virtue and innocence. Virtue has successfully passed a point of temptation. No one is a mature Christian until they have attained virtue--innocence is not enough." Anonymous

I hate temptation, I quite often pray that God will remove it. But as a good friend pointed out in his comment on my post about the Desert Fathers, according to James 1:2-4, the testing of our faith is a good thing, because persevering through trials and temptations brings us to maturity.

I was reading 2 Peter this morning. I really really love the first chapter, particularly verses 3-9. It also addresses this issue of growing in virtue. Peter lists a number of virtues that the Christian should add to their faith; goodness, knowledge, self-control, perseverance, godliness, brotherly kindness and love. Peter says if we possess these qualities in "increasing measure" we will be productive and effective in our knowledge of Christ. I think "increasing measure" indicates a process of growth, as the wording around the list of virtues does by use of the "and to this quality add that" phrasing.

What I think is particularly useful is verse 9. Sometimes when we are going through a season of temptation and are not seeing progress it can be difficult to see how we will ever move forward, and think will I always be this sinful?? Is this the area of my life that will never be sanctified this side of eternity. God's answer in verse 9, is that we are short-sighted to think like that, and that we "have forgotten that he has cleansed us from our past sins". I think this means we trust in Him to cleanse us again and again, we trust in the finished work of Christ.

So I think we keep at it, keep working to add those virtues, keep facing the temptations knowing that He is using them to work in us, and remember the cross, and that as much as we continue to fail He is still faithful to forgive us when we confess our sins.

God bless,
Bec

Some interesting thoughts from the Desert Fathers...

From The Desert Fathers: Sayings of the Early Christian Monks, Penguin Classics

On controlling the tongue
"They said of Agatho that for three years he kept a stone in his mouth in order to teach himself silence." (p20)

On temptation
"When Cyrus of Alexandria was asked about the temptation of lust, he said, 'If you are not tempted, you have no hope; if you are not tempted, it is because you are sinning. The man who does not fight sin at the stage of temptation is sinning already in his body. The man who is sinning in his flesh has no trouble from temptation.'" (p35)

"Poeman said, 'The character of the genuine monk only appears when he is tempted.'" (p63)

"A hermit said, 'We do not make progress because we do not realize how much we can do. We lose interest in the work we have begun, and we want to be good without even trying.'" (p66)

"A brother came to Poemen and said to him, 'Many thoughts come into my mind and put me in danger.' He sent him out into the open air, and said, 'Open your lungs and do not breathe.' He replied, 'I can't do that.' Then he said to him: 'Just as you can't stop air coming into your lungs, so you can't stop thoughts coming into your mind. Your part is to resist them.'" (p101)

"A hermit said, 'Satan has three powers, which lead to all the sins. The first is forgetfulness, the second negligence, the third selfish desire. If forgetfulness comes, it causes negligence, negligence is the mother of selfish desire, and by selfish desire we fall. If the mind is serious, it repels forgetfulness, negligence does not come, selfish desire finds no entry, and so with the help of Christ we shall never fall." (p127)

On Fasting & Humility
"Joseph asked Poemen, 'How should we fast?' Poemen said, 'I suggest that everyone should eat a little less than he wants, every day.'" (p99)

"Antony also said, 'I saw the devil's snares set all over the eart, and I groaned and said, "What can pass through them?" I heard a voice saying, "Humility".' (p148)

"Evagrius said, 'To go against self is the beginning of salvation.'" (p153)

On the Word of God
"John who had been exiled by the Emperor Marcion, said, 'One day we went into Syria to see Poemen for we wanted to ask him about hardness of heart. But he did not know Greek and we did not have an interpreter. When he saw we were embarassed, he began to speak in Greek saying, 'The nature of water is soft, the nature of stone is hard; but if a bottle is hung above a stone letting water drip down, it wears away the stone. It is like that with the word of God; it is soft and our heart is hard, but if a man hears the word of God often, it will break open his heart to the fear of God.'" (p191)

God bless,
Bec

Pursuing Holiness

I've just finished reading a collection of sayings of the desert fathers. These dudes were intense! In the third century they moved off into the desert often on their own, some became hermits or lived in communities with other hermits/monks and dedicated themselves to putting their flesh to death.

It was very interesting. Partly, because the austerity of their way of living is SO in contrast to the way the average modern believer lives. I'm not entirely sure that they were completely right in the way they lived, my biggest objection being that it is hard to love your neighbour as yourself if you don't have any neighbours. Also hard to spread the gospel if you are not at all in contact with the world. However, I am really impressed with the intensity with which they desired and sought after holiness. OK, so some of it was probably in reliance upon themselves rather than God, but they definitely seemed to live that verse where Paul says, "I beat my body and make it my slave" (1 Cor 9:27). They fasted, they lived in seclusion, avoided women, kept vows of silence, subjected themselves to suffering for their sins. A couple of them went so far as to castrate themselves based on an overly literal interpretation of Jesus' statement, "If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off" (Mark 9:43) Ouch!!!

There were some bits that suggested to me that they were working on a works based theology rather than grace, but you could equally interpret their behaviour in light of James 2:14-26. Faith without deeds is dead. If we truly believe that He has redeemed us, and called us to live holy lives, then surely some degree of zealousness in pursuing holiness would be a sign of faith.

I was challenged by the desert fathers. Not to move into the desert, praise God! But to take more seriously the call to live a holy life. I think I need to stop making excuses to myself about the weakness of my nature, and be more determined to lean on God for the strength to make the hard choices that are needed in my life in order to overcome sin. God willing that won't be actual bodily amputation (although some days I think that physical bodily mutilation would be easier than dealing with the sinfulness of my heart). But I think it is wise to cut off opportunities for sin. Proverbs 5:8 is illuminating, and I think applies more broadly than just to the context of avoiding adultery, "Keep to a path far from her, do not go near the door of her house".

I want to learn better to follow the promptings of the Spirit, and work with Him better to live a life that is pleasing to God. I want to understand more fully the offensiveness of my sin to God, so that my desire to not sin will be more motivated out of a desire to please Him rather than a sense of guilt and condemnation that makes me feel bad. I do not want to presume on His grace, although I know that my entire existence presumes on His grace. I want to better understand Christ and what He did for me at Calvary. I want to walk free because He paid so dearly for my freedom. Mostly, I want to know Him better, more closely, more deeply, more intimately. I want to know Him better than I know myself.

God bless,
Bec

The effects of pornography

Following on from my post yesterday about Rudd's clean feed policy the following article from The Age today is interesting:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/the-internet-and-the-rise-of-porn/2008/01/02/1198949896984.html

If anyone doubts that the internet has meant that children are being exposed to sexually explicit material at an earlier age than in previous generations, then the statistic that 84% of boys and 60% of girls had been accidentally exposed to pornography on the net is illuminating. And as this article shows, much of the content is not only sexual but of a violent nature as well. If this is the material upon which young people are forming their values regarding what is right within a sexual relationship then we can expect to see a big rise in sexual violence. The sad part will be that as that behaviour is normalised in society people will become increasingly accepting of being used by each other in degrading and violent ways.

This to some extent is already true. There is already a culture that teaches young women that their value is in their looks, and in their ability to attract men. It teaches women that they need to be sexually available and if they do not want to participate in some sexual acts that they won't be able to get/keep a man. The disturbing thing is that this has all happened in such a way that women defend this sort of thinking and behaviour as "equality with men". The other attitude that can accompany this is a pleasure in the power that men's lust gives women over men.

All of this is SOOOOO far from what God intended. A relationship that is based on taking from each other, and manipulating each other by what each person can give/withhold from the other, and on various power-plays is sick and doomed to failure. There is no intimacy, no sharing of hearts & minds. This is slavery not freedom.

It is hugely important that as a society we do something about the proliferation of pornography. Since the advent of the internet, because of the increase ease of access, as an emotional, spiritual and pyschological threat it is like this threat has gone nuclear. It will destroy the lives and loves of children, teenagers, adults, men and women if something is not done. It destroys relationships, marriages, tears apart families. It hurts our relationship with God. It isn't just "a bit of fun".

What God wants for us all is SO much better. Mark Conner's Sacred Sex series was great on the topic of what God DOES intend sex to be. See especially the first part!

God bless,
Bec