Category: Walking With God

Lead, Follow or Get Out Of The Way


Was it Clinton who repeated that very useful mantra?

I am just a tad fed up with some ex-church colleagues.  They throw general statements around, stomp out and then make pathetic attempts to light small fires  to get their way. What a load of rubbish. What a lack of personal character, let alone leadership qualities.

I was just saying to someone that quite frankly, we should stop wasting time with the likes of such people. They will attempt to vent whatever pathetic little voice they have left on whoever who would feel sorry or courteous to still listen to them. The smart ones would rightly think such views rubbish. We really should stop wasting time on these people.

By all means accept them with open and sincere loving arms when they decide to be smart about it and lose their little self’s that’s preventing them from becoming what they ought to be. Until then, we should all ignore them and move on.

A Fool of a Lawyer


That’s Alex Stewart from Brisbane. The 29-year-old must have thought it hilarious to video himself tearing up pages from both the Bible and the Quran and using it to wrap tobacco before proceeding to light up.

I know life’s often hard and one can always use a laugh and take oneself less seriously but life is also short enough to think about things more seriously and make it all count. This sort of just gives a free kick and show how foolish one can become if one holds on to atheism. Really if there’s no God, why take anything seriously?

Alas, God is. His word according to John, is Him. So it’s kind of really foolish to mock it the way this young lawyer did. It’s a bit like the Chaser mob maybe, where the mantra of life is – have a laugh. All else is secondary. One day, something will happen in their lives which will change this mantra forever. When that day comes, I hope people like Alex Stewart will have unburnt copies of the Bible around, to have a means of seeking what it all means.

Dove? Love!


This Quran burning fiasco thought up by the Dove World Outreach Centre in Florida (it only happens in America?) is seriously misguided.

This phobia against all things Islamic has been played up by right wing America for so long now. I get endless streams of emails and youtube clips warning against the march of Islam. Often these emails are outright lies. Many recipients have foolishly forwarded these materials without making the simplest and quickest of checks. Kiddo once showed me the “Let-Me-Google-That-For-You” slap in the face type of site and senders of such emails should acquaint themselves with this facility.

We live in such angry and confusing times that clear thinking is more important than ever before.

I can’t understand how burning Quran can further the kingdom of God. Even if we are compelled to consider Muslims enemies, we have been asked – commanded – to love our enemies. The universal edict to love our enemies as ourselves requires an even higher standard of adherence when we are taught Jesus himself is love. Loving Muslims is not the same as believing or giving credibility to Islam or the Quran. In fact loving them is how we are to start sharing with them the gospel and the saving grace of God. If we are bloody minded in surging ahead with our chest thumping brand of Christianity and continue to initiate pogroms of sorts such as this. We are further than ever before, from reaching out Muslims with God’s love and be a bridge to share the saving grace of God with them. We have to start believing that when they see God’s love and saving grace, they will be lead by the Spirit to see the foolishness of man’s independent attempts to reach God, including via the Quran. Jesus asked us to be wise as serpents but harmless as doves. There can be no better context to apply this wise command from our Lord.

Gay Church in Malaysia? My Gay Thoughts Revisited


Gay Church? (Re-publishing in light of current interests in Malaysia…)

I have friends whom I think may be offended by what I’m about to write in this entry. It concerns homosexual practice. If you are one of these people, I hope you know by now that I believe God is real and He cares about us. He has great plans for us and I trust Him enough to know these plans are great ones. There is only one condition – that I must let Him be God and not try to play His role for Him. So, whatever my personal views may be about homosexual practice, they are secondary to what God has said in the Bible about the matter.

Personally, I don’t have any problems with homosexual practice. I am not one, have no such tendencies, and am prepared to accept that there are many with homosexual tendencies or preferences. To many, these tendencies and preferences are so strong they do not want to keep fighting them. They think perhaps life is to be lived, not fought against. They think a relationship is about commitment and sacrifice and building something together and there is nothing in a homosexual relationship which inherently precludes these virtues. I agree with these views. I would have subscribed wholly with them and would have supported same sex union as a logical consequence of these views. These however, are my personal views. As a Christian, I believe my personal views are not always the right ones. They can’t be. To insist that my personal views must prevail is to breach the condition set out above. His (perfect) plans wont work, and mine, which are no where near His (perfect ones) would kick in. My views really are a distant second to His, which is perfect.

I honestly do not know what to make of claims that homosexuality is a natural thing. It’s like someone who prefers one food to another, or has the natural tendency to use his left arm instead of his right. How can preference for one food over another or using one arm over another, be such a bad thing? Honestly, I don’t know. I dont know what harm there would be if say, half the world is gay. Maybe the world population would go down. The nucleus family would no longer be the norm. Is that a bad thing? I don’t know. If homosexuality becomes as common as a heterosexual union, it would be the first time since time immemorial, that the issue of parenthood becomes re-examined and the accepted convention of 2-sex parents is no longer. I don’t know what that does to the psyche of a child and how that affects his or her development and what sort of adult that child eventually becomes. It is such a vexed issue. It would certainly mean discarding what has worked for centuries, in favour of/exchange for acceptance of certain sexual preferences. Assuming the gays are right and it is perfectly “natural”. It is still only our way, not God’s. In fact, God wants us to subrogate our natural ways to His ways. The Bible speaks of dying to self in order to live. There are in any event, lots of things we naturally want to do but don’t, because they aren’t good for us. We wont go there for now however.

There is a Malaysian pastor who is now contemplating a gay church. This is just a bit whacky. Not that homosexual practice is whacky. It isn’t. It’s quite cool actually. It is however, against God’s ways. Jesus preached love and forgiveness and acceptance. That is true. He also however, preached obedience, repentance and judgment. These aren’t cool. They are however, core teachings of Jesus. To start a gay church would be like starting a church for any other perpetrators of any other practice which is against God’s ways.

We don’t for example, even think for a moment about say, a paedophile church. Before you scream murder, I’m not equating paedophilia with homosexuality. The obvious argument that one damages innocent young children while the other is between consenting adults is a familiar one with which I agree. However, again those are my views. They don’t matter. God’s views do. In fact they are the only ones that do. One doesn’t even have to proffer any arguments which a paedophile may put forward to justify the practice. You don’t need for example, to produce scientific evidence to show maybe some children aren’t damaged and may even acquire some life lessons. I know that is repulsive. I know society simply does not find paedophilia acceptable. My point is there will always be subjective views. Expert opinions change. Community rejection or acceptance of any matter is subjective. What is now unacceptable may be acceptable at different times, just as what was previously unacceptable may now be acceptable. The only objective standard is God’s. Okay, that is my belief. I know that to be true, because it is right there in the Bible (eg 1 Corinthians 6:9).

You know why the church today has credibility issues when they shout and thump their chests against homosexual practice? It is the issue of consistency. Homosexual practice is a sin, as is theft, lying, killing, jealousy, covetousness, and all the other practices listed in Exodus somewhere as well as in other parts of the Bible. In fact, remember Billy Graham’s 7 deadly sins? You hardly hear the church condemning these anymore. Why condemn homosexual practice but keep silent on theft for example? Why no word against murder? Why has the church not examined for example, the actions of people like George W and Robert M to see if they have perhaps committed murder? I know I know. George was defending his country, you may say. Really? From what? Terrorism? I thought that was in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and maybe Afghanistan? From oil drought? Ah…maybe he was then guilty of covetousness? Or did he not remember that and the other stuff in Exodus 20:15ff? If in lying and coveting Iraq’s oil he let his own view prevail over God’s that is as much a sin as homosexual practice is. Why didn’t the church condemn it but pretty much cover its head with ashes over homosexual practice?

So to the Malaysian pastors and churches crying out against that gay pastor, I say well done. However to sound a bit more credible, you should also take a stand against other practices which are against God’s ways. How many church goers in Malaysian churches today are guilty of sharp business practices (theft, lies, coveting)? How many have mistresses? How many overtly support regimes which condone murder (I have in mind the Malaysian police which the general public in Malaysia believes have committed murder in the summary execution of suspects in shootouts, pushing addicts off buildings, bashings in lock-ups and prisons leading to deaths)? Why does the church single out homosexual practice as a sin to condemn and leave the other iniquities alone?

So back to that gay church – no it wont work. I believe gay people in Malaysia aren’t Christians. If they turn up, it wont be because they are Christians – it would be because they are gay. It would be just another gay club. You cant for example preach on godliness because to be godly you need to well, subscribe to His ways. A homosexual practitioner has chosen to choose his own way over God’s. If however the intention of that church is to help practising gays get rid of that practice then that would be a great thing. That pastor could set an example and say homosexual practice is a sin in that it goes against God’s ways. It wont be a cool or popular thing to do, but godly.

Related Articles

Self Must Die


One of my favourite television programs is the Band of Brothers. My favourite episode in that series concerns a Lieutenant Spiers. In that episode, Easy Company had emerged from a torrid time in a forest in Bastogne under freezing conditions. They were asked to take over the little town of Foy from the Germans. Easy Company was under the charge of an ineffectual commander and couldn’t break through the German defence until Spiers stepped up and took over. Spiers stepped up, took command and lead from the front. He blazed through and ran from one vantage point to another, methodically and courageously picking out snipers and artilleries. His brave feats lead Easy Company to complete victory and they overcame the enemy.

Later as the men took a well earned rest, someone asked Spiers how he did it. What was his reply? He said:

The only hope you have is to accept the fact that you’re already dead. The sooner you accept that, the sooner you’ll be able to function as a soldier is supposed to function: without mercy, without compassion, without remorse. All war depends upon it.

To function as a soldier, one has to accept that he is already dead. The sooner that acceptance occurs, the better the soldier will be able to function.

Dying to self is essential to effective function. He is no fool to give up what he cannot keep, to gain what he cannot lose. These were the words of Jim Elliot the missionary was killed in Ecuador.

The Bible has always taught giving up of self. The elevation of self is the greatest lie the devil perpetuated to continue to suppress man and deny him the fullness of life that self sacrifice was meant to bring. Leave the 99 sheep behind to seek that one lost sheep and forgetting the nine coins in order to find the one which is lost. Giving up what we have – which we can’t keep – to find the greater gift given by God – which we can’t lose. The devil seeks to stoke our egos, our self.

Genesis 3:4 has the serpent saying to Eve 4 “You will not surely die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

Elevating man to the status of God seems on the surface, to be fulfilling man’s “purpose” but in fact is the death knell that sees man separated from God. To truly live, the self is to first die.

To move forward, one is asked to first lay down himself to the extent of death. Jesus has shown us what this means. In John 12:23

23Jesus replied, “The hour has come for the Son of Man to be glorified. 24I tell you the truth, unless a kernel of wheat falls to the ground and dies, it remains only a single seed. But if it dies, it produces many seeds. 25The man who loves his life will lose it, while the man who hates his life in this world will keep it for eternal life.

So this morning as we remember His death for our sake let us seek to forget ourselves and focus on Him. More than 500 years ago, Nicolaus Copernicus discovered that the earth is not at the centre of the universe. Let us embrace the Copernican revolution and accept that we are not at the centre of the universe – God is. It is not about us. It is all about God and His plans. Let us see things from the perspective of God’s Kingdom and His purpose for His Kingdom. For only then can we be one as His family, as He commanded us to be.

Let us give thanks together

Heavenly Father, we thank you for your gift of redemption in and through Jesus, your only begotten Son. We thank you for His obedience. We ask that you will teach us to obey just as He obeyed. We ask that just as submitted to Your will we too will know how to look beyond ourselves and yield to Your will and Your purpose for Your church. In Jesus’ name we pray, Amen.

In Matthew 26, it says in verse 26:

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

Let us eat the bread together to remember Jesus’ obedience on the cross.

Verse 27 – Then he took the cup, gave thanks and offered it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. 28This is my blood of the[a] covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

Let us now drink from the cup and accept the shedding of Jesus blood on the cross for our sin. May God bless us all.

Give – really give – and you will be blessed


Every now and then it clicks and you experience it: It really isn’t about me and it really is more blessed to give than to receive. The Lord is right of course, as He always is.

My local church has been planning a stream of activities which if God allows it to all come to fruition, will see the end of a long chapter in that church’s history. Come decision time, we may well see the start of a new chapter. And so some of us have been thinking of closure in some of the things we have been doing.

For all the tiredness we often feel in carrying out various tasks, and for all the issues and stress we often feel, we really have been blessed.

When we are able to say it isn’t about me or what I want but it is about others and what is best for them, things can change dramatically. It isn’t about whether the legacy and history that has been created (which often is about us) continues to remain. It is rather, about whether God’s people grow in their knowledge oft their God, and whether they grow in obedience and submission to Him. If we dwell on how the church started and keep harping on what it was all about, we may well miss the point of what it should be about.

Looking ahead, the church can be better. It can be better if it is willing to take the step forward. It can be better if we give up what we can’t keep anyway, in order to receive what we can’t lose. The Lord said that too, didn’t He? We can’t keep history and legacy. When we move on either through death or other circumstances, those who come after us will be lead by God to do what God wants His church to do in most cases anyway – build each other up, preach the gospel and establish His kingdom. If what we seek to do now is to further those areas how far should history and legacy go to check that kind of progress? I say the less the better. When we give those up, we will be blessed in return – not in the form of good to us personally but in the form of what good it will do for the Kingdom of God – for His people.

If we are able to truly give, we will be truly blessed.

So What Does He Want for ICC? How do we know?


This was a response to a query on whether voting in a local church works…

Ascertaining the will of God

Ascertaining the will of God is an area many have wrestled with for a long time. Shelves (or is it megabytes these days) have been filled with such material. Sometimes it doesn’t look like we are any wiser.

I believe the texts you have cited have more to do with guidance and the will of God in terms of what we must do to lead godly lives – lives where God reigns as Lord and King – ie God wants us to have salvation – be His children. See for example verse 1 (blessed because transgression forgiven), verse 2 (blessed when God doesn’t hold us for our sins), verse 5 (acknowledgement of sin and God forgave) and verse 11 (we are righteous as a result and should rejoice). The context of Psalm 32 is therefore God’s instruction for salvation is promised.

I have copied the whole of Psalms 32 below to provide context.

Similarly Matthew 7 deals with the same subject matter. It’s part of the beatitudes which speak of being blessed in the sense which implies more than mere happiness but in a state of reconciliation with God. You will be glad I have not copied Matt 5 – 7, I’m sure it is accessible with just a few clicks of the mouse.

Therein I guess, lies the trickiness of seeking God’s will – the Bible is a book provided to instruct on God’s plan for salvation. The theme therefore is the Kingdom of God and our reconciliation with God in that Kingdom. How then do we seek instructions from a book like the Bible for decisions we have to make here on earth?

We all know God guides and He does so in all things, not just the “big” things. But how does He guide? Sometimes He speaks to us directly but for many of us that is a rarity in terms of what we are waiting to hear. He has spoken for example about how He will save us, how He will establish His Kingdom and how He wants us to be part of that Kingdom. But when I am contemplating between say, taking a job in Company A or Company B, how does He guide us? Does He still “speak” in the sense we often wish He does? How many of us wait till God “speaks” (in that sense) before we act?

This is not to say we don’t let God guide us. He does, and does so in all things.

I believe God guides us in many ways. When we use for example our minds to process information and analyse situations or circumstances is this not letting God guide us? Or are we uncomfortable with being logical and methodical and will only be comfortable that He guides only if the unnatural or illogical or abnormal or weird things happen? Are we not comfortable and secure that God has transformed our minds and hearts and souls so that when we think, feel and act according to our minds and circumstances we are still letting God guide us all the same? If I spend each day praying and reading His word and meditating on God’s word, does that not mean we are positioning ourselves in a way which will let us be guided by God even if we use our minds to process information and circumstances? Must a “voice” be audibly heard and logical thoughts and process be excluded before we can be certain we are being lead by God?

I am also confident that the way God had allowed me to say, spend my childhood in Malaysia, go to Uni in Sydney, work as a lawyer and have a wonderful family, in fact all facets of my life are God’s leading, designed for me to continue to make decisions which reflect God’s guidance. Every one of us have been lead by God in similar fashion and can safely make decisions knowing God leads even if we don’t audibly hear. It may be boringly logical and rationale but it is still being lead by God none the less.

Voting

I’ll quickly say that the law requires an organisation such as ICC to undertake a voting process. We need to demonstrate to the authorities that the decision has been put to the members to be voted on, before the integration can take place.

The law aside, is voting prohibited in the Scriptures?

There are absolute truths which must not be subject to voting. Personally for example, I believe the issue of homosexual clergy was wrongly voted by the Anglican church. It wasn’t an issue which should be subject to vote. This is an area where the majority doesn’t get to say what is right – God’s word does. If you look at the tenets of faith of major denominations (including orthodox streams other than evangelicals) you’d find many basic principles which must never ever be subject to vote. These are areas where dogmas count and God’s ways must prevail.

There will be issues and matters flowing directly from these basic principles which I further believe must also not be subject to vote as either the Scriptures have clearly taught on the issue or they are important to safeguard the basic principles.

There are nevertheless, processes and decisions which affect other areas of church life and in my mind, can be subject to vote. Imagine you have a congregation of 500 persons and the church is contemplating buying a property to (say) establish an evangelism hub/outpost. How does the church decide whether to buy or not to buy?

Revelation? Of course – one assumes church leadership already has that. The issue is simply whether to buy the property or to rent (say) or whether to buy property A or property B.

The church leadership thinks it is a good idea to buy and it should opt for Property A. What next? The constitution and the law says since the property will cost in excess of x% of the annual income or net assets of the church the general members must approve the purchase. What does the church do then? Pray, of course. What next? Pray till all 500 are convinced it is the right decision? No seller will wait for you. The church will never buy that property and if we think that means it was God’s will that it does not buy the property, we are not being truthful because it is a case where to require all 500 to be comfortable is to load the decision and tilt it one way from the word “go”. It may well be all 500 can come to the same agreement very quickly but what do you think is the more likely outcome?

Voting can be a valid mechanism to ascertain the will of God – there is no scripture to say we must not vote. Surely we don’t say for example democracy is not godly because it relies on voting. I know this is a church we are talking about and I have already made the point that in a church only where absolute truths are at stake that we must not contemplate voting as a basis for deciding. Other than that I cannot find any scripture verses which say this is not biblical.

Countless other evangelical churches (both here and in other parts of the world) make a whole range of decisions based on votes. Who are we to say they are less godly (or more worldly) because of this?

Body of Christ

No one will argue against harmony, coordination and love. That is something all churches strive for. However, why can’t we achieve harmony, coordination and love by way of submission to each other’s wills and wishes? Which harmonious family achieves harmony without someone agreeing (submitting) to the common will or common good despite not agreeing to that course of action himself/herself?

It is a sign of a matured organisation that even when some disagree, they fall in line because it is what everyone else wants and the organisation as a whole is what matters, not individual preferences. If I may be so bold (I may be well off the mark theologically speaking), can I also say that Jesus appeared not to want to go ahead with the plan for salvation? In the Garden of Gethsemane the spectre of death on the cross borne by the Son of God and King of kings must have been so grotesque that we are told our Lord perspired as though he bled. His submission to the will of the Father however, ensured the salvation plan proceeded. This submission to the will of the collective is something I must learn more of. It is demonised by western culture which is so individualistic but it is so very scriptural.

I will be very candid and say I am at peace in that whatever the outcome, I am happy to go along. If the members decide not to proceed then so be it. We simply have to go back to the drawing board and seek God again. But please note I would have voted yes and yet be at harmony with everyone else as far as this decision is concerned. I only ask everyone to likewise keep an open mind. What I want counts but what the church as a whole wants, counts even more.

Yes we want to see harmony, coordination and love but that can only be achieved with submission by those whose wills are in the minority. Unity necessarily means some of us will have to bend our wills. Jesus did. I am prepared (indeed happy to) if that is what members want come voting time. We have to of course then consider charting the next phase all over again but that discussion is for another day.

Leadership

Let me be very candid again and say part of the reason why communication and process for the integration has been short of ideal has to do with how much the leaders wrestled over the proposal when the idea was first floated. The leaders went through a long drawn process before it found itself ready to be accountable to members and recommend a course of action.

The Board has agreed to explore integration and has taken steps to facilitate this. The numerous meetings, meals, games etc have all been designed as part of the integration process.

At this stage, as a Board member, it is my recommendation that we proceed. That however is only my personal position. The choice is still with every individual member. It is again, a requirement of the law that each member of the church has the opportunity to make his or her voice heard.

I am also reminded of Joshua in his old days. Having asked the Israelites to remain faithful and serve God, he also asked that they choose whom they will serve (see Joshua 24:15). Was Joshua transferring responsibility – sort of handballing it off – to the Israelites? Individuals have always been accorded choice – we see this in many instances in the Bible.

Providing individuals with a vote – a choice – isn’t abdicating responsibility. It is recognition that you can only lead meaningfully if the wards follow submissively but willingly (I do not believe the two are mutually exclusive).

The responsibility of leaders is to identify a course of action or a path and say this is where we as leaders think we should all go. Its role is to provide that course/path and facilitate the choice. Leaders can counsel members to take a given course of action but as Joshua did, members have to be told that it is their choice. In this instance I happen to agree the law got it right in requiring members to make that choice. I don’t think it is leaders asking the flock where to go next, it is a case of leaders saying this is where we should go and according members the choice to follow.

Psalm 32:
1 Blessed is he
whose transgressions are forgiven,
whose sins are covered.

2 Blessed is the man
whose sin the LORD does not count against him
and in whose spirit is no deceit.

3 When I kept silent,
my bones wasted away
through my groaning all day long.

4 For day and night
your hand was heavy upon me;
my strength was sapped
as in the heat of summer.
Selah

5 Then I acknowledged my sin to you
and did not cover up my iniquity.
I said, “I will confess
my transgressions to the LORD “—
and you forgave
the guilt of my sin.
Selah

6 Therefore let everyone who is godly pray to you
while you may be found;
surely when the mighty waters rise,
they will not reach him.

7 You are my hiding place;
you will protect me from trouble
and surround me with songs of deliverance.
Selah

8 I will instruct you and teach you in the way you should go;
I will counsel you and watch over you.

9 Do not be like the horse or the mule,
which have no understanding
but must be controlled by bit and bridle
or they will not come to you.

10 Many are the woes of the wicked,
but the LORD’s unfailing love
surrounds the man who trusts in him.

11 Rejoice in the LORD and be glad, you righteous;
sing, all you who are upright in heart!

Give Us A King? No, Just A Pastor


Is ICC seeking a pastor comparable to the Israelites seeking a king towards the end of Samuel’s watch (in 1 Sam 8)?

Samuel is one of the most revered characters in the bible. One gets the sense that he was chosen and especially loved by God and God must have held Samuel in a really special place in God’s own heart. Samuel’s story of being the well loved son of Hannah – the promised son – is always a heart warming one and the story of how when Sam was a little boy God called out to him in the middle of the night is a story my ex-boss Mr Chooi often recounted with affection. Eli’s counsel that young Samuel should say “Speak Lord, your servant is listening” is advice I have sometimes heeded and applied in my own life in the middle of some nights.

Samuel was the last of the Judges of the Old Testament. He preceded Saul and kings who came after him. God chose judges such as Gideon, Deborah, Samson etc to be the bearer of God’s message, protect the Israelites and restore (somewhat) the kingdom of God.

Many of the passages which dealt with the exploits of the judges start with the words “Israel had no king” and they are followed by texts which suggested everyone did as they pleased as a result. At these times, the kingdom of God ebbed and flowed and God’s people went through phases of disobedience and suffering interspersed by periods of victory when lead by these judges.

These judges were clearly instructed by God and they obeyed Him (Gideon’s famous woolly wobbles aside). Without these judges the Israelites suffered at the hands of their tormentors (such as the Philistines). The Israelites relied on these judges for salvation and deliverance from God. They knew salvation and deliverance come from God, but they nevertheless looked to these judges to lead them towards such salvation and deliverance. Unfortunately when the Philistines leave them alone they tend to forget God and become unfaithful again, giving their allegiance to other gods (e. g construction of the Asherah poles)

Even Eli who comes across as a long suffering patriarch of some sort, had to wrestle with rebels in the form of his own sons! Samuel suffered the same problem. It reached a stage where the Israelites probably became fed-up that they could no longer rely on these judges to protect them from their tormentors.

It was in such immediate context that the Israelites began asking for a king. It was in such context that the Israelites’ demand for a king was considered rebellious and ungodly. God said to Samuel that their demand for a king was rejection not of Samuel but of God.

One should take note of Deuteronomy 17:14-20 where it says (way before Samuel’s time):

14When you enter the land the LORD your God is giving you and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, "Let us set a king over us like all the nations around us," 15be sure to appoint over you the king the LORD your God chooses. He must be from among your own brothers. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not a brother Israelite. 16The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the LORD has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." 17He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray. He must not accumulate large amounts of silver and gold.

18 When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the priests, who are Levites. 19 It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the LORD his God and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees 20 and not consider himself better than his brothers and turn from the law to the right or to the left. Then he and his descendants will reign a long time over his kingdom in Israel.

So it isn’t the act of asking for a king which displeased God – God had already told them this was going to happen. In fact the bible said it was Samuel who was displeased. There are things God said was important when they appoint a king (verses 15ff). The Israelites weren’t disobeying God and doing something which displeased God when they appointed a king, it was when they disobeyed God and rejected Him, choosing instead the gods of the land as their gods, that God is displeased. God’s displeasure was also (maybe) due to the fact that the Israelites had not yet taken possession of the land as witnessed by the constant wars they still had to fight with the likes of the Philistines. So they weren’t ready yet for a king in the manner set out in verse 14 (see above).

In considering this lesson, is ICC really asking for a king?

Of course not – instead of rejecting God and choosing other gods, ICC has been seeking instead to know God better and serve Him better. ICC considers that with a pastor, it will be better able to systematically understand the word of God and apply that knowledge and understanding in better ways and therefore be better placed to be disciples of Jesus and help others to also become disciples of Jesus. By seeking to have a pastor, ICC is in fact seeking to be better equipped to acknowledge Jesus’ kingship and allow God to be truly God and Lord. It may be said therefore that the context between the Israelites asking for a king and ICC seeking a pastor is entirely at opposite ends to each other.

I used the word “pastor” loosely, in the sense of a full time worker amongst a local church, identifying and ministering to the spiritual needs of members. I make no comments or discourse on the imports of Ephesians 4:11ff, and acknowledge the person we conveniently label a “pastor: could well be a servant in other capacity instead. That however is for another day.

If seeking a pastor is to be likened to Israelites seeking a king during Samuel’s watch, does that mean the vast majority of churches – which have pastors – are not obeying God, somehow “doing church” in a manner which displeases God?

When 1 Sam, in Chapter 8, said the Israelites were asking for a king they did so to be “like the other nations”. “The other nations” refer to the likes of the Philistines – ie non-believers, so ICC seeking a pastor is again very unlike the Israelites’ request. One may say ICC seeks to revert to type and seek a model that a vast majority of churches adopt but that in no way can be said to be ICC wanting to be “like the other nations”. The Israelites were wanting to be like other ungodly peoples; ICC is wanting to be closer to God, not like other ungodly people.

I am confident that we are not displeasing God by seeking to have a pastor. It is in no way akin to the Israelites seeking a king in the manner of 1 Sam 8. As always, we need to be clear in our minds when we seek to draw lessons from the Bible. The better approach is to seek the bible as a starting point and not arrive at a position first and then seek biblical support for our position.

Oh Danny Boy


“Pray and act accordingly” alludes to exhortations in the bible for (particularly) the Israelites to repent, turn to God and live godly lives. The many instances of God likening Israel to an unfaithful wife for example, is a call of similar nature ie to turn back to God in repentance and live godly lives. That is the consistent theme running through the bible.

“Pray and act accordingly” is not, never has been and never will be a command by God for us to vote in a particular way in a country’s general election. To use that phrase and disguise one’s own preferences with a biblical call is to mislead and teach wrongly.

Danny Nalliah was wrong in 2007. When I first heard his “prophecy” in late 2007 I was as excited as thousands of Christians in Australia. I wanted John Howard to be returned to office. I have admired John Howard since my student days, when Howard was still trailing in the shadows of Bob Hawke, Paul Keating and even Andrew Peacock. I am also a great admirer of Peter Costello. I often regret and lament his absence from the Liberal and Coalition leadership.

Even though I wondered why Danny Nalliah attached the condition “if the people of God prayed and act wisely” (words to that effect) I sincerely believed his prophecy.

When he turned out to be wrong, I was willing to forget it. I would say Danny Nalliah was not a prophet and he should maybe continue his work as a pastor. He appears to be a good preacher so maybe he would stay within what God appears to have called him to do. I thought he would disappear from providing any leadership in terms of socio-political issues. I had thought well of him during the days when he was prosecuted under the anti vilification laws so I had only good thoughts of him then.

However he began to defend his so called prophecy by blaming Christians and church leaders instead. Apparently it was the fault of Christians and church leaders that the “prophecy” wasn’t fulfilled. Was it truly a prophecy or simply his thoughts which are reflections of his personal preferences for conservative politics? I cannot recall any prophecy in the scriptures where such conditions were attached. Danny Nalliah acted more like a pedestrian lawyer with an exit clause for quick release, than a prophet with a clear message from God. As many have said previously, if we were living in Old Testament days, Danny Nalliah would have been stoned to death for being a false prophet.

Danny Nalliah has continued the work of demonizing left politics. He is more an echo of American styled right wing politics than a servant of God. Danny Nalliah questioned if anyone who votes Labor can truly be considered as having a proper relationship with God. If this is not false teaching I would have to truly question every single evangelistic sermon I have ever heard. “Repent and Vote Conservative and you will be saved”, is what the likes of Billy Graham should have probably preached.

Why anyone would choose to give Danny Nalliah anymore time of day (for socio political matters) is really beyond me.

He would not entertain anyone who questions him in any way at all. His website famously would not post any comments which have anything remotely against him or question him and his website contents, no matter how innocuous and factual those questions may be. I suppose his excuse and guise is he does not want to be discouraged from fighting on for the Lord. My guess is he cannot stomach a true discourse of how to engage the world without compromising his beliefs. He simply does not know how to engage the world. He needs to be praying for wisdom, and forget about all the stuff he writes about anything concerning politics or social commentaries. He needs to appreciate facts and truth based on facts, a lot more.

Danny Nalliah is already a notorious target for saying the bushfires of 7 February 2009 is a result of ungodly laws passed by the Victorian parliament. Danny Nalliah is suffering as a social pariah and clown not because of his faith in Jesus but because of his own folly. Danny Nalliah is often incoherent and mixed up in his views and commentaries. Danny Nalliah cannot be trusted to provide leadership when it comes to representing the church or Christians. He cannot distinguish between pure and honest discourse and outright support. In the world of Danny Nalliah, to accord respect to a person and let him or her speak is to support and agree with that person. That is childish and immature and betrays old seated feudalistic baggage. When he goes on to chastise Christian leaders for doing this and implies that congregations of such leaders should throw such leaders out, he betrays a mindset and attitude that is scheming and manipulative and the mala fide nature that needs to be weeded out.

This is not about supporting Julia Gillard, in case Danny needs anymore spelling out. It is about setting out the facts clearly and fairly. It is about understanding the views of Australians who prefer Labor and engaging them from a Christian perspective. Equally, it is about engaging Australians who vote Conservative to see if they too can start to impart elements of compassion and fairness in their policies. These too are tenets of the Judeo Christian legacy and which are too often given the short stick by Conservative policies.

For a start, Danny Nalliah and his fans can maybe avoid what appears to be vitriol and have a look instead at: http://www.markconner.typepad.com

Context Please


It has been said many times, that “text without context is pretext”. At the expense of sounding dismissive and/or patronising, I believe recent prolific references (by individuals in my church) to verses in the bible belong in this category.

One has a thought and looks for verses or even passages to give meaning to that thought. Often this sequence of seeking the Lord ends up in a confusing message, especially if the person concerned has the view that somehow he (or she) is a “spiritual person” so the thoughts he (or she) has had and the bible verses he (or she) has managed to find must be given the fullest attention by those around him.

Often this person cannot articulate what the meaning and application of those thoughts are and will be at pains to draw out the relevance of the bible passages quoted. When asked about the contexts of those passages, they revert to the dogmatic position that those thoughts are “from the Holy Spirit” and must therefore (by implication of course – this is never said outright) be given the fullest attention. The clear disconnect with the bible verses or passages are then left aside.[1]

With respect, this is inching closer to cult practices, where a cult leader would insist what he heard is from God and no one is to question that “voice” no matter how remote or irrelevant it is to the situation at hand.

I do not ordinarily dismiss such tendencies. If one thinks he has heard from God so be it. That however is a personal experience and should be kept within the bounds of a personal journey that person has with God. If the personal experience is to be imposed on the congregation it becomes another matter.

Such imposition must only take place if the church has clearly strayed away from clear biblical truths or teachings. In this regard, if the bible is silent on a given decision, then it is a decision the persons entrusted with the responsibility of leading may make by taking into account all relevant circumstances. Individuals’ personal bends aren’t the determinant of these decision especially if the thoughts or preferences arising from these tendencies are remote and do not bear on the decision to be made and run counter to what the rest of the congregation thinks best.

1. It is like those verses or passages have a character of “funtus officio” and no longer need be considered. It is then conveniently forgotten that those verses did not actually support the thoughts (because they are wrongly used) so those thoughts remain the private thoughts of that person.