And you thought people were joking when they called it Stalker-book

As part of my application of the principles of GTD I've been trying to clear some of the excess information from my life. Today's job is deleting obsolete messages from my Facebook inbox. Now we all know that the meaning of the word friend has taken a battering thanks to Facebook, but I think this is pushing it a bit too far. About two years ago I had a woman contact me through a Facebook message, regarding a distant male relative who shared the same surname as myself. This remains my weirdest FB experience even topping the guy who I met once 15 years ago, that recently added me as a friend.

This was the message;

Subject: (_______)

hey, could you please mention to the abovementioned person that i'm now ready for him to hold my hand at the counsellor and if he could bring the $50 I sent him that would be greatly appreciated. 

Also let him know that I'm moving to Darwin in Feb, just in case he wants to tell me that he's going to be there soon for a music festival or for work, just for the sake of saying it.

Maybe just resend what I've written. It's quite sarcastic but he'll understand the real meaning...

Cheers!

(_______)

The sad conclusion is I forwarded it on to the relative who filled me in a bit and informed me that the police were now involved.

I schemed a scheme [UPDATE]

For the past two years I've been a ministry apprentice as part of the Ministry Training Strategy. The MTS national director Ben Pfahlert is always encouraging people to refer to the position as an apprenticeship rather than saying "I'm doing MTS". Ben's reasoning is 'MTS' becomes an entity that represents more than it actually is - an apprenticeship; a formalised kind of one-to-one hands on ministry training.

I put forward another reason not to call it "doing MTS"; people are constantly confusing the initialism MTS to stand for the Ministry Training Scheme. Which just sounds dodgy.

[UPDATE: Someone at Moore College informed me they heard MTS actually used to be called the Ministry Training Scheme, but was changed because it "sounded evil". Can anyone confirm this?]

PC

Not sure this is entirely PC.

Centrelink operator:

Do you have any Aboriginal in you?

No. That's cannibalism. And it's illegal.

What do Little Lion Man and Daniel 6 have in common?

They're both about lions, kind of.

Maybe I should have done an arts degree, because occasionally the creative side of me bursts forth in joyous song. It isn't always that joyous for those in the room at the time, but within I brim with joy. English folk band Mumford and Sons have been my soundtrack for summer and they currently sit at number two on both the single and album charts. As such, I was inspired as I listened to them win the Triple J Hottest 100 to combine a great song that mentions lions with a famous Bible story that does likewise.

Those with a high threshold for average singing and musicianship can check out the results here.

Lyrics are in the comments.

Here is the original;

Abused Bible Verses #1

As my trusty co-pilot, on long drives Sarah operates our iPod. Enjoying one of her selections the other day I asked, "What CD is this?"  I forget which CD it was now, probably because I tuned out before Sarah had a chance to answer. I was distracted by my own question; my language was archaic. It's like one of my parents asking "What record is this?" The question showed my generation. To transcend generations I should have asked, "What album is this?" It's like an older gentlemen I heard about who called his television "The picture-wireless."

I love words. It's why I enjoy cryptic crosswords, bad puns, alliterative sermon titles, and writing songs. I like the way a catchy phrase can be used to capture or illustrate a complex idea; the other day I wrote down two phrases to remember for future sermons "Mr Right and Mr Right Now" and "A One-Life Stand." And yet words and language are ever-changing in their meaning and usage. What does it mean to be evangelical when it is attributed to any quasi-Christian group that happens to be proclaiming a message whether it is of the gospel or not? And so we are in a right and constant battle to try and define words in order that we can define ourselves.

Mikey quoted Phillip Jensen the other day speaking about how we find as we study history that "By using the wrong words, we laid open for another generation to come and pervert the gospel." To what degree should we care about the words that we use and the words that are used about us?

And so with this disproportionately longwinded and largely irrelevant introduction I present to you 'Abused Bible Verses #1'

Abused Bible Verse:

Remind them of these things, and charge them before God not to quarrel about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers. - 2 Timothy 2:14

Most common abuse:

In this postmodern relativistic age, 2 Timothy 2:14 is used within discussion by persons who tire of disagreeing with you about the meaning of words. This objection to 'quarrelling about words' is a card that can be played regardless of the significance of the word in question. For example when suggesting to an individual that apart from the obvious difference in spelling, 'temple' simply doesn't equal 'church' as we understand it, the individual in question would counter with the quotation of 2 Timothy 2:14 and a stern warning about the repercussions of continued disagreement.

Allocated cinema seating

Am I the only one fiercely opposed to allocated cinema seating? It's not a premiere, the cinema is inevitably less than half full and if you care that much then arrive early.

Fast food fast

I'm more of a feasting rather than a fasting kind of guy. And until recently I was also a McFeast kind of guy. So the story goes, one night after church a few of us decided to head to McDonald's for a late dinner. This coincided with the end of Ramadan (an important occasion in Lidcombe) and amongst the crowd, the chaos, and the confusion I was mistakenly given two large burger meals. Knowing that were I to return the second burger and chips the OH&S policy meant it would be discarded by staff, my non-existent ethical framework kicked in and I decided to eat both. Two sorry meals later I vowed to give up McDonald's for a thousand days.

Feeling happy with the success of the venture, a hundred days into the fast Sarah and I decided to begin a new thousand day fast expanded to include all takeaway food and soft drink. This would mean we ate healthier and more importantly cheaper than we had been.

Apart from the obvious question of 'why deny yourself such pleasure?', the most common response we get from people is "Well, what can you eat?" This is followed by a barrage of questions trying to pin down our position - What about pizza? Can you eat chinese? Does fish and chips count? Isn't Subway healthy? Everyone is fascinated by where we are drawing the line.

Many of the people who read this blog are also familiar with my friend and blogger of all things interesting (and more!) Nathan a.k.a. The Pharasaical Faster. I was impressed to hear of Nathan's new financial year resolution to give up fast food and soft drink. I was less impressed when I discovered on visiting Nathan in Townsville that "It's really only the major chains." Which meant burgers from takeaway shops were still in. He also "decided pizza doesn't count" and "There's only one Oporto in Townsville, so it's not really a major chain."

The last thing I wanted was to have my resolutions ridiculed in the way that I did Nathan's. But people were right; we did need to decide our line. So here it is.

1. Anything made at home is kosher. E.g. Frozen fish and chips, homemade burgers.

2. When eating out it is acceptable only to eat food that is served on a plate during the regular dine-in experience. E.g. Pizza chains are out, but local gourmet pizza is in, KFC is out but Thai is in.

I initially wanted to simplify it to "anything served on a plate" but my Dad told me I just needed to always carry a plate with me.

What do you think? Will it work?

Letterbox droppings

I quite like junk mail. One of the few negatives about our first experience of living in a high density dwelling is the lack of advertising material placed in our letterbox. Each of the four units has a "NO JUNK MAIL" sign next to the hole, and just in case you don't get the idea a giant "NO JUNK MAIL" sign stretching the length of the boxes. Our street must have a bunch of junk mail haters because some advertisers have taken to a tactic not often seen on residential streets - placing their flyers underneath our windscreen wiper blades. I expect my landlord is secretly planning some way of incorporating a "NO JUNK MAIL" sign onto his vehicle.

Apart from the obvious larger retail chains, local takeaway establishments and pest controllers, it seems that Christians are one of the more likely candidates to letterbox drop you. I know I've done my fair share of kilometres of sidewalk* strolling. At Cumberland Uni Church we usually got a response rate of about 6 people per thousand flyers. It may have been a sign of the spiritual need in the area considering the response rate in Carlingford is usually about 1 per thousand. It was from one of these flyer drops that the now infamous incident occurred where a visitor was relieved to find out we were a university church rather than unitarian.

The big dilemma when letter box dropping is should you put church advertising into a letterbox marked "NO JUNK MAIL"? My logic is that it's not junk so it's fine. That said I'm not certain I managed to convince myself at the time that this was acceptable.

*My two worst Americanisms are calling rubbish 'trash' and calling the footpath the 'sidewalk' or 'pavement'

Proverbs for the 21st Century #9

Proverbs for the 21st Century 1:9

They say don't judge a book by its movie, but should one judge a church by its songs?

Sarah and I experienced a bizarre providential occurrence a month or so back when during the morning we visited our new church where we'll be student ministers this year and that night had our farewell at Uni Church. Despite the fact they're different denominations three of the four congregational songs at each were the same.

Not sure what to make of it.

Are small churches necessarily welcoming?

A small church is just as likely to be insular and inhospitable as it is welcoming. So don't take it for granted.

The young preacher feedback translation guide

It can be tough as a young preacher just starting out in the world of expounding God's word. There's so much to contend with; how to handle the Scriptures themselves, how best to deliver that message, getting used to speaking in front of people. And yet perhaps more difficult than anything else is how to make sense of the feedback you get - both from the congregation and from those more experienced at preaching.

Helen is one of the dearest old Christian saints you would ever meet and a valued member of the church where I started out preaching. Helen is gentle in a way that I could never be, and yet when the truth of God's revelation is under attack she is bold in a way I think I could never be. The result of all this is that Helen's words are cherished by the congregation. The best feedback I have ever gotten off Helen was "That was really great Izaac - I stayed awake the whole time." Now, a young preacher could take that many ways. My point is simple, knowing who is giving you the feedback will help you interpret their comments. Thankfully being aware of her narcolepsy meant that I rightly took Helen's words in a positive light.

Having now preached at least fifteen sermons in my life, I consider myself a veritable expert. Consequently I feel an obligation to pass on the treasure trove of wisdom that I have accumulated over this time to those just starting out as preachers. I now present to you my 'Young preachers feedback translation guide.'

Feedback: It was good.
Translation: It may or may not have actually been good.
This general platitude is the equivalent of being given a K-Mart gift voucher for your birthday - a nice gesture but one that required little to no thought and has little reference to you personally. It's what you say when you have nothing to say. This is not to mean that the sermon was necessarily bad. Or good for that matter. It just was. Maybe that's what they really meant -"It was a sermon". Yes, it is descriptive without offering any real comment on merit. "It was good" is the Hallmark greeting of sermon feedback.

Feedback: It was the perfect length.
Translation: It was probably too long.
Even if you legally changed your name, you would still not be Mark Driscoll. If anyone comments on the length of your sermon it is usually an indication that it was too long - even if stated in the positive. I wish to qualify this by saying most people that comment on sermon length are revealing more about themselves than the content and quality of the sermon, though it is nevertheless concerning when after proclaiming the word of God, the first thing to enter someone's mind is how many times the second hand on their watch clicked past 12. To be slightly more optimistic there is a chance you did speak an appropriate length for the context but working in your favour is the "strange voice" phenomenom; that if you're not the usual voice to be heard people will concentrate longer. Have you ever noticed how much easier it is to concentrate when you hear a guest speaker? The 'strange voice' effect is magnified for preachers with foreign accents. If you ever become a regular preacher, should you wish to insist that you can speak for as long as you want my advice would be to feign a different accent each week.

Feedback: There was a clear distinction between the two halves of the sermon.
Translation: Both sermons you preached were fine. Either one would have sufficed.
Generally it is only necessary to preach one sermon at a time. I know there was a lot there to cover, and yes I know you didn't set the passage and deep down it's probably God's fault for putting so much in there, but there really is no need to study each syllable in depth. I'm loathe to comment too much here because I received this feedback word for word from my ministry trainer after this sermon, which thanks to the interwebs is now preserved in all its double goodness for future generations.

Feedback: It was extremely thorough.
Translation: Did you really need to put it all in there?
It was clear you've put in an awful lot of work in preparation for the sermon. It was way too clear. On most occasions good preparation would be a positive thing, but by the fifth sub-point and clarification on point 2C, the concentration was starting to wane. It's an amazing thing to discover the depths of God's word as you prepare, and a less than amazing thing to share all 17 related references in the New Testament.

Feedback: You're very gifted.
Translation: You're very gifted for someone preaching their first sermon.
It's all a matter of expectation and comparison. Let's be honest, we weren't expecting very much. And therefore 6 out of 10 is great when we were anticipating something closer to 2. The hope is that you exponentially increase your ability over the first few sermons, and in your favour is the obvious comparison to your "earlier" work. Don't take this feedback too negatively as they obviously want you to return. But though gifted, you are only "God's gift to the church" in a very general sense.

Feedback: We're very proud of you.
Translation: We're very proud of you.
But that's about the end of where you can trust the feedback from anyone who sees you standing up there and feels proud. It's true, they are proud as punch and the moistening of the eyes as they see you explaining God's word now you are all growed up means they will look on most of what comes out of your mouth with the mawkish sentimentalism of a mother flicking through baby photos when their child leaves for university. Most likely this person remembers when you were banned from youth group after smuggling fireworks into camp, and they're just glad you're still alive and not in prison.

Feedback: I learnt...
Translation: Feedback heaven.
Preaching the word of God means seeking to understand the word of God and moving the hearer to be obedient to it. Because preaching involves speaking in public, most people will give you feedback about public speaking. The best feedback you can possibly receive is that you have taught the hearers. Provided they are discerning listeners who agree with your understanding of the passage, this means you have preached successfully. While tempted to think you've "arrived" and it's only a matter of time until you're beamed directly to heaven, thank God that he communicated his truths through a weak sinner and that he was at work through his Spirit to change the hearts of his people. Finally, pray for humility when people praise you - it's easy to look smart when you're communicating the mind of God.

Here endeth the lesson.

Bitter Chocolate by Carol Off

Everyone has a line. And I think mine just changed a little. Bitter Chocolate by Carol Off has caused me to reevaluate my line. The mysterious line about which I am speaking is the point at which our theoretical ethical framework kicks in and we make that most courageous of movements – the moral stand. Through the pages of Bitter Chocolate somewhere between the ancient Mayan civilisation and 21st century Australia, I shifted a little in my attitude toward chocolate.

Off is a Canadian journalist who in Bitter Chocolate details the history of chocolate from it's beginnings as a favoured drink in South America to the current multi-billion dollar confectionary industry. Weaved throughout the narrative of the cocoa seeds use in food is a story of imperialism, corporate greed, and slavery. As the book’s tagline suggests, Off highlights “The dark side of the world's most seductive treat."

In one sense, changing the mind of the reader could perhaps be the greatest indicator of a books success. Yet I'm not entirely certain it was through any persuasiveness of the writing that my particular view of the chocolate industry has been changed. Like I am discovering with a lot of reading, the underlying philosophical reasoning of the author is here found particularly close to the surface.

Some of Off’s stories are fascinating. The Spanish conquests in South America discovered a society that was run on cocoa - the beans acting as currency throughout the Mayan empire, or the accounts of how the various chocolate families (Mars, Cadbury, Hershey's, Nestle) came into being. At this level the book is engaging. However these nuggets of gold are found more towards the front end of the book, while the back-end slows as the narrative is dominated by Off's investigation into links between the exposing of child slavery in the cocoa fields of Cote D'Ivoire and the murder of a French-Canadian journalist Guy-Andre Keiffer.

Anti-capitalism is rife throughout the book. The majority of the blame in regards to the abuse of Africans is through the greed of corporations. I don't know if capitalism is a bad thing (unless it's that annoying thing Kanye West does where he WRITES EVERYTHING IN CAPITAL LETTERS), but I do know enforced child slavery is excessively evil, and yet I wasn't convinced of the almost exclusive blame Off laid on capitalists being the root cause of all that is evil in the industry.

Another fascinating aspect of the book is the supposed contradiction inherent in the Western chocolate-makers. The Cadbury's and Hershey's were philanthropists who it appears really did want to improve the lot of humankind. Both chocolate-makers built entire towns around their factories for the families of their workers. Cadbury created the town of Bournville (from which we get Bournville Cocoa) where it can be said the workers received the benefit of workers rights before such a thing existed. The Cadbury's gave workers areas for recreation, cheap housing, affordable loans and superannuation. And yet this generosity of spirit towards their workers stands in stark contrast to the blind eye turned to the rights of those thousands of slaves who were farming the cocoa in appalling circumstances. 

The view given of Christians also raised questions for me. Blame seems to fall easily on the Spanish invaders of the Americas who in the name of the church were seeking to tame the savages. Off's position seems to be tainted with the commonly esteemed view of native society as a thing to be protected at all costs; the sentimentalism that gives rise to the view of the noble savage. Adding confusion to the picture is the unusual link of church and monarchy throughout the most prolific times of colonisation. So while atrocities may have been committed in the name of the church, it is inevitably difficult to see in many cases how the invaders were serving King Jesus more than their earthly King. Yet Off seems to be at pains to highlight the Spaniards Christianity at their moments of greatest abuses. The attention given here is unsurprisingly missing when Off is forced to concede that it was Christian missionaries (whose motives are inherently easier to identify) that alerted the world to the extent of abuse of children in the harvesting of cocoa in Africa.

Now back to my line. The natural end to the book is the focus on the fair trade cocoa industry; those companies which are seeking to purchase their cocoa in an ethically acceptable manner. In the past I havn’t taken much notice of the fair trade movement. It's not because I dislike Coldplay. It's mainly because of the Christian people I saw supporting it and the theological differences I had with them. It's not that they weren't Christian, but rather they seemed to be more interested in fair trade than the unfair trade of Jesus life for mine. Fair trade became a kind of gospel substitute - something to convict the world of that would have real and lasting impact in this age. And yet my dismissal was not very Christian of me. Because they were right. I should care where my chocolate comes from. I should desire to improve the lives of people I will never meet on the other side of the world through my purchasing choices. I should give fair trade a fair go. The words of Isaiah something something were echoing in my ears. Well, clearly not the words as I can't remember them, but definitely a discussion we had at Bible study late 2008 when part of God's indictment on Israel was their abuse of the disadvantaged to increase in their unrighteous wealth. One of the many wise women in the group Leisel likened it to us buying the cheapest milk available rather than Dairy Farmers milk which gives a fairer price to farmers. Others questioned the merits of shopping at Aldi. My conclusion was I preferred to be more frugal than philanthropic, that it was an issue of balance and I preferred to find the best price.

And yet now my line has changed. I am beginning to take a few wobbly steps as part of a moral stand. Am I boycotting the cocoa industry? Nah, if I didn't purchase from companies that did evil things I'd starve. But when buying tea, coffee or chocolate I have begun where possible, purchasing a fair trade alternative. We all have a line. In hindsight maybe my line hasn't changed as much as it should, but we all have a line. Where's yours?

This book was definitely food for thought, but that food is now fair trade.

Let me conclude with a completely irrelevant food joke which I recently had to retire because I realised the words were spelt differently.

Hostess to me:

"Would you like some pesto?

My reply,

"No thanks, I'm antipasto."

Mark this down

Dubbo Coles.
6:37PM
13/01/2010
First Easter eggs spotted.

What I learnt from my visit to Hillsong

I used to joke that St Paul's Anglican Church Carlingford where I was employed had successfully beaten the tired old three application points to every evangelical sermon of "Read your Bible more, pray more, and tell more people about Jesus", by instead adapting a four-part "Read your Bible, pray, tell people about Jesus and Hillsong is evil." This is of course the jest of an ignorant young man, and is far from the truth. However I have learnt much being a follower of Jesus just around the corner from the Hillsong megachurch.

Nestled in the heart of Sydney's Bible Belt, Hillsong Church is arguably the most influential single church in Australian Christianity. For the past three years I've been a part of Baulkham Hills North Anglican Church which is itself in the middle of Hillsong country. I'm not quite sure what to make of the concept of "The Bible Belt" and yet you can't deny the disproportionate amount of churches in the area. As one person put it to me recently about church in Carlingford, if you can't put up a sign that says "Church meeting here this Sunday" and get 50 people to show up, you should give up the game.

Sarah and I decided a few weeks back since we finished up at Cumberland Uni Church and Baulkham Hills and are yet to start as student ministers at Carlingford Presbyterian, to use the month of January to visit churches and see what we can learn from the way others are doing things.

"I just don't want to go" Sarah pleaded, when I first suggested Hillsong.

I reasoned in return, "If you don't want to, that's fine. But they're the most influential individual church in Australia, so it's worth knowing what they're doing."

"I'll feel like a fraud."

"How many students did you meet at uni last year that go there? How many own their CD's? How many attend their annual conference? You can't deny their influence."

For those playing at home, I won, so off we headed last Sunday evening to the 6pm congregation at Hillsong's first and largest campus in Baulkham Hills.

Hillsong Church began as the Hills Christian Life Centre in 1983. Seventeen years later they claim to have 20,000 people attend their services each week and through their incredibly popular congregational CDs (which regularly achieve gold and platinum sales) as well as the role of Brian Houston as former National President of Australian Christian Churches, Hillsong has disproportional influence on the church in Australia.

Now before I share what I learnt during my visit, let me first offer a disclaimer. If you already know that any potential criticisms I might have of Hillsong will leave you labelling me as "just another Charo-basher" then it's probably best you don't bother reading on. It will save both of us a lot of hurt. Well, not me, but definitely you. I could assuage your anger by offering "Some of my best friends are pentecostal" but I doubt I would be successful, and regardless I would not wish dear reader to patronise you. Likewise, my comments are my own and general in nature based on my experience and reflections on Sunday 10th January 2010AD. And before you comment that "My best friend's sister's cousin's great aunt's kelpie's original owner attends the church, and he happens to be a very godly Christian", let me state clearly that I am not making comment on any individual person who has in the past or currently attends the Hillsong Church. Similarly, I wish to state for the record that my bark is worse than my bite. I am told I am much more pastorally sensitive when speaking with someone in person rather than in written form.

At the ministry training strategy SPUR conference last year, we were challenged by one of the speakers Greg Lee to not just write Hillsong off, but instead to ask "What are they getting right? What can we learn from them?" One of Greg's observations was "They know Jesus left them with a gospel and not a creed." The criticism of the evangelical crowd in attendance was clear - Hillsong's congregation aren't happy to simply be doctrinally pure, but to recognise that God gave them a message to proclaim, and they're out there doing it. And as Sarah and I drove the 40 minutes or so to the Hillsong Convention Centre, Greg's challenge to ask "What can we learn from Hillsong?" was ringing in my ears (this would be an opportune time to make jokes at the expense of the loud music however the sound quality was surprisingly quite poor - especially to hear introductions, prayers and most of the announcements. This may have been a result of our seating location as well as the music being played in the background, but it was even relatively difficult to hear the main speaker who didn't have the benefit of a constant movie score being played behind his words.) So what can we learn from Hillsong?

My first impression was simply the enormity of everything. The gathering was huge. The building holds 3500 people and it was packed to the rafters for the 6pm Sunday service. The auditorium is a thing to behold, and so I beheld it. It is new and big and extremely fitting for their size. If you had 3500 people at church, why wouldn't you have a building like it? Tiered seating, comfy chairs, climate controlled, specced out sound and lighting, university style folding desks for writing; it is a lovely building. As a son of a builder I appreciate good construction however it would be remiss of me to digress longer on the building, because church is not really about the building at all.

I've always wondered about how welcoming is done in a gathering that large. The primary way welcoming is achieved at Hillsong is by inviting newbies to a newcomers supper after church. As for during the meeting, there was a moment to meet and greet, which consisted of one person beside us and one in front introducing themselves, shaking our hand and then turning back to their immediate friends. At least this quasi-rejection was friendly, and achieved with perfect smiles. I know they weren't newcomers because the guy that greeted us in front spent the whole time of singing, surfing Facebook on his iPhone. Actually, so did his friend two seats down. I wonder if they were messaging each other? Other than that, another insular group was to our left. To the right, there were two seats - perfect for another couple to come and join Sarah and I. And not too long into the singing they did. My friendly smile was returned with another perfect one in kind. Yet I was surprised to look over at the end of the song to discover they had disappeared. Sarah tells me they spotted some friends not far away and had gone to sit with them. Oh well, there were still people coming in, we still had hope of another couple coming and speaking to us. As spare seats were at a premium we soon had another couple join us. Yet again, while I was busy singing, these too slipped away unnoticed as they had spotted friends not far away. The third couple to sit beside us stayed. I like to think it was because they could sense we were new and didn't want us to feel rejected, though I suspect the reality was that it was getting towards sermon time and there really was nowhere else to sit. They did well to stay, as I must have freaked them out a little because already twice bitten I kept weirdly looking at them out of the corner of my eye to make sure they wouldn't stealthily leave as well.

As a group, the congregation members were young and pretty. So fitting in wasn't a problem, but something else must have given us away, because we were identified by a woman sitting behind us as newcomers. I suggested to Sarah perhaps it was that we had brought along our Bibles, but that couldn't be right, as we weren't the only ones with Bibles, even though we needn't have bothered. I think what gave us away was the puzzled expression we gave each other as during the second last song about 20-30% of the congregation just packed up and left. We weren't sure what was going on. I thought it might be so they could set up for the newcomers supper, and this was no doubt true for some but once we got outside it was soon clear that just like major sporting events, once the result was certain the race was on to get out of the carpark before the traffic jam. The woman who invited us to the supper was herself a relative newcomer who had been there for eight weeks and said it was all a bit different for her and was taking some getting used to. She was extremely nice to us, but the crowd was filtering out and so we soon wished each other all the best and went our separate ways.

The message was delivered by Danny Guglielmucci. I use the word message deliberately as his opening words were "I'm not going to give a sermon tonight - instead I'll give a word of truth." I'm certain he would consider his sermons as words of truth too, but it was not a strong beginning. By the end of the 40 minute address I was wondering if not opened, that perhaps the Bible would at least be quoted. Sweet relief came late and fast.

"I didn't have a verse tonight, but if I did it would have been 2 Timothy 4 'Fight the good fight'. And there are good fights and bad fights -  and we're to fight the good ones."

That was it. I learnt absolutely nothing from 40 minutes of this 'word of truth'. At least nothing of significance. This is not a personal attack; Guglielmucci has gone through some difficult life experiences, and he seems to still trust God. He was an engaging speaker and yet I just left off feeling hollow, like there was some void that I was waiting to be filled that just wasn't going to. I felt like shouting out - "What about the Bible?" I assume as a guest speaker that failing to refer to the Bible virtually at all is not normal practice, but seriously. There must have been 100's of visitors in a crowd that size, and I can't see how they left with anything close to an understanding of Jesus or God or the Bible, or the necessary of rebirth through the Spirit. It was just a sad, wasted opportunity.

This lack of gospel presentation didn't prevent a call for a response. This was done in a bizarre manner, because I'm still not even certain what they were responding to. I think the phrase was 'If you've realised you're hurting before God' or something similar, then come on down. The pastor who called them down, who looked like Brian Houston's son but didn't introduce himself, kept saying the response was "awesome" that all these people were coming to the stage. I can't judge their hearts, and I hope it was the end of a process where people had been telling them about sin and about Jesus death on their behalf, but if their response was purely as a result of what had come before that evening, then I can see absolutely no indication to suggest they have any idea of why they came down the front. Thankfully, they were taken outside for a minute to pass on their details and to be given a Bible, so my prayer for them is that they were consequently explained the gospel. At the very least they now have a Bible which hopefully they will use, even if it's usefulness was implicitly discouraged by its lack of reference from the preacher.

Also good to note is that the guy that looked like Brian Houston's son was proven not to be a false prophet. After the initial call for people to come forward, we all sang a verse and chorus of a song as about 10 people came forward, while we waited for the repeat verse and chorus another call was issued for more people to come forward, and they did - another 15 or so. Lastly, the Brian Houston-looking guy "had a feeling" that "there's more people out there", and though he assured us "We don't normally do this", we went for a third repeat verse chorus in order for those who didn't come the first two times. Initially it didn't look promising, but eventually another two willing participants stepped forward to prove that amongst us was indeed a true prophet.

I truly was optimistic about learning from Hillsong. Sarah and I went to one night of their conference a few years back to hear the most (literally) god-awful sermon I've ever heard in my life from T.D.Jakes. And yet I was optimistic. I'd heard they'd mellowed over the years - that the unhelpful pentecostal and charismatic elements that had developed over time had been minimised as they went mainstream. But sadly to my view all that is left is motivational speaking for the masses with some-Christian sounding words thrown in and some well-played if lyrically airy songs.

So what can we learn from Hillsong? What are they doing right? Greg Lee was right - many of the people that attend Hillsong do indeed know that Jesus left them with a gospel and not a creed. I'm certain many of them are saved. Most of those who I know personally who attend are indeed much more evangelistic than myself. But by evangelistic I mean, not proclaiming the gospel per se, but just being a bit more overt in their God-talk. As for the content of the message they are proclaiming, if it's as lacking in content as what was served up to the faithful last Sunday then I can see no proclamation of Christ crucified, no obvious call to repentance, and therefore no salvation that leads to life. This all sounds very much like criticism from my high horse, but it truly was exceptionally hollow. We must not confuse desire to proclaim a message with desire to proclaim the gospel message.

It's great to ask what can we learn from Hillsong. It's great the members are known for getting out there and having a gospel to be proclaimed rather than a creed to memorise. And yet surely we must ask, if this gospel message is not the gospel of the crucified and risen Lord Jesus for the forgiveness of sin then I can not but conclude if all we are learning is they have a message to proclaim with fervour, then I need look no further than PETA anti-fur protesters or Mac users or GTD proponents for my example.

Sure let's ask what we can learn - and I got some great ideas about managing a large crowd (each kid in the kids program is given a number and if there's any problems, their number flashes on the screen for the parent to come and get them), great ideas about production values, and graphic design - but for most of the aspects of the meeting that I liked, I say to myself, I'm not certain this is being driven by sound theology and so is this something I want to be copying?

There were so many people there who came to be gathered with God's people but what a wasted opportunity.

Interestingly door-knocking around Baulkham Hills, I discovered for many people Hillsong is the nominalism of the suburb. In the way that people in some suburbs would dismiss you with "I'm Anglican", it is common to hear "I go to Hillsong". The follow up question of "That's great, how often do you go?" often reveals a former or semi-regular attender with an unsurprisingly hollow understanding of the gospel.

I know that the Bible must surely play more of a role in the regular meeting. And so it is my hope that the many blessings God has given Hillsong church and their visibility as a gathering of God's people and their pull-factor and their fame would be utilised for the powerful proclamation of the gospel. I pray that God will convince them further of the truths of Scripture in a way that would enable them to proclaim the true gospel in all its fulness. Because there are I'm certain 1000's of Christians within their meetings who understand the gospel, but are sadly being fed fairy floss. And I'm not certain that were they to put on some good music and actually preach the gospel powerfully and well that God would not use that for his glory and continue to bring spectators and huge numbers of people who consequently respond to Jesus in repentance and faith to be brought to eternal life.

**As one points the finger, three fingers are pointed back at oneself**

Note to self

Note to self: Must read emails more carefully.

Preaching at uni for three weeks on MICAH, not MALACHI.

Thankfully, my only preparation thus far has been reading Malachi over breakfast with Sarah for the past 5 days. An exercise of inherent worth regardless.

One definite positive is that the next book to read over brekkie has now been decided.

Back in the habit

In response to Nathan's question in the comments;

Does getting things done prevent getting blogs posted?

No. But moving house and having to wait 4 weeks to have your internet connected does. But thanks to my tax dollars* I have set up shop in Marrickville Library and am making good use of their free Wi-Fi.

As for what I've been up to over the break, apart from lots of reading I recently had the privilege of speaking on Joshua at Maclean Presbyterian Church, which is the congregation I grew up in. If you'd like to have a listen and give me feedback, you can download the talk here. Just a disclaimer; we were meeting in the church hall as they were at the very end of renovating the old church building. As such, the recording is pretty poor quality. I don't really sound like a chipmunk.

This is my outline;

Joshua - God Promises a Land

What’s so good about the land?

1. A hard act to follow

2. God, the promise-maker

3. Savouring the moment

4. The land and the promise-breakers

5. Life in the land: rest

6. The Levites inheritance

What’s so good about the land?

*This is a bit misleading as the $36 I paid in tax last year was refunded, and I am in the process of applying for Centrelink Austudy payments.