On Why You Don't Read The Bible

I've copied this from the EA web site because I think it is a helpful analysis.

Three reasons why you don't read your Bible

From the earliest years of your Christian life- whether as a child raised in a Christian home, or as somebody brought to faith and discipled in a church group- you will have been told how important it is to read your Bible regularly. You decided to try some sort of Bible read through and set to reading four chapters a day. Early zeal meant you tore through the Gospels and enjoyed the drama of Genesis, but before long you ran into rock solid Romans, or life-draining Leviticus. You missed a few days out, and then… well, it's been a while since you found the will to pick your Bible up again.
Why is that? There are three very common reasons, and they all have solutions that aren't so much to do with how well disciplined your are, but more about the way you think about the Bible.
1) You don't have time

This may be the most common 'reason' we give to explain to ourselves why we've not read the Bible for a while: events of the day got on top of me, my feet have hardly touched the ground, I overslept. The fact is that our priorities reveal what we truly value, and the 'not enough time' excuse is most likely a cover-up of one of the two reasons below.
2) You think the Bible is about you

The first is that deep down, you feel your Bible reading isn't 'working'- and it's really because you read the Bible with your eyes on yourself. As you read it, you're looking for practical lessons on life, instructions on how to behave, and commands to go away and do right now. And you find that the Bible doesn't provide these particularly well!
The solution to this problem is to see that the Bible is about Jesus and not us. The solution is to take our eyes off ourselves and begin to look at Jesus in the Bible...You will find that far from dutifully going to the Bible for handy hints for the day, you will gladly run to it so that Christ will conquer your heart afresh; so that you will take your gaze off yourself and obsess over him instead.
3) You think your Bible reading is for God's benefit

Everyone will be familiar with this situation: you've been going strong with your Bible reading, enjoying it and feeling your love for the Lord grow. But something comes up (perhaps opportunity for a Saturday morning lie in) and you miss a day. Somehow the next day gets dropped too and, before you know it, it's been a week.
The feeling you get isn't a stomach-rumbling or a dry throat; not a spiritual hunger or thirst. It's a nagging guilt which tells you that if you really cared about God then you would have read the Bible, that you really should have finished Jeremiah by now...The diagnosis for you is that you imagine your Bible reading to be doing God a favour. The crushing guilt you feel when you miss it is your heart telling you God is displeased, and the slightly haughty contentment you feel when knocking out five chapters instead of your usual four is your heart telling you that God is now smiling on you...
The solution is to recognise and live in God's grace. You are eternally loved and accepted by the Father because of Jesus...In this context the Bible is given to us as a gift to feast on, rather than a project to complete before judgment day. We will find we go to it to savour and enjoy, and when we miss a day we might feel hunger pangs, but we could never feel guilt, fear, or condemnation.
Conclusion

The Bible has been given to us to help us know and love Christ. Our Father is generous and loving, and loves to communicate with us; the Spirit has inspired the scriptures so that they bring life, joy, and fullness to the Christian walk. If you have misunderstood or abused the Bible up until now, making it about you and your efforts, simply look to Jesus instead: the One of whom the Bible speaks, and the One on whom your salvation rests. Read it to love and trust him more.
Daniel Hames is training for ordination at Wycliffe Hall, Oxford. He is also an Associate Staff Worker for Theology Network.
Used with permission from the author. This is an extract from a longer article produced on Theology Network.

Biblefresh and N T Wright

Over at slipstream on the EAUK site - here - a video clip has been published of N T Wright, one of the biblefresh bible champions talking about bible reading and Christian leadership. Just in case you don't want to go over to the EA site, which you should some time, here is the clip:

Keep Praying For Haiti

I've copied this from the EA web site.

As Evangelical Alliance member organisations respond to the earthquake in Haiti, the Alliance is calling on Christians to pray for the survivors and the relief efforts.

The earthquake, which measured 7.0 on the Richter scale, struck on January 12. Relief and development agencies, including Alliance members, responded immediately, deploying staff and creating emergency appeals.

Magalie Boyer from World Vision, who have 370 staff in the country, spoke of the earthquake: "It felt as if a truck had hit a wall. There is extensive damage in the city. People had to spend the night in the streets. They are not comfortable staying in their houses." Boyer added: "World Vision Haiti will distribute first aid kits to survivors, along with basic materials such as soap, blankets, clothes and bottles of water as an initial response."

Power and communication lines are down for miles, roads are blocked and damaged and there is a lack of equipment. This has all stalled the relief effort and made bringing aid to survivors more challenging.

Jennie Evans, Tearfund's Head of Region for Latin America and the Caribbean said: "'With so many buildings destroyed and so many people made homeless, the need for shelter and basic essentials such as food and water is extremely urgent.'

Impoverished Haiti is no stranger to disaster, but this latest earthquake is the largest to hit the Caribbean in 200 years, causing widespread devastation.

With the epicentre just 10 miles from the capital Port-au Prince, countless buildings (including the presidential palace and UN office) and homes have been destroyed and the official death toll is rising continually. Thousands of people sleep in the streets in fear of another aftershock, the hospitals are overwhelmed and family members across the world await news of loved ones.
British rescue teams and Government rescue specialists have landed in nearby Dominican Republic and although figures are uncertain the Red Cross estimated that three million people need emergency aid.

Distressing news pictures depict the injured and dead lying in the streets and screaming from underneath rubble.

Bishop Gerald A. Seale, General Secretary of the Evangelical Association of the Caribbean, said the earthquake has had a devastating impact on the progress made in recent years to develop Haiti, the poorest nation in the Western hemisphere."The social and material gains made in the past two to three years have been totally wiped out by this earthquake," he said. "As Christian NGOs gear up for a major response in the next few days, we need to give sacrificially and pray."Steve Clifford, General Director of the Evangelical Alliance UK, said: "At a time like this many of us feel powerless to do anything when we see devastation but as Christians we can always do something.

"Please give generously, and pray passionately for those who have lost everything in this disaster, that aid workers reach the thousands in desperate need and that the Church in Haiti is able to respond to the needs of those suffering."

Prayer points:
Pray for Haitians as they cope with the shock and aftermath of the earthquake.

Pray for the injured, that they would receive the medical attention and assistance they need, and for God's comfort for those who have been bereaved.

Pray for rescue efforts - that survivors are reached quickly and that communication and power lines are restored.

Pray for the local church leaders and Christians as they minister and offer spiritual, physical and emotional help to their neighbours in need.

Pray for the government and leadership in Haiti as they respond.

Pray for the safety and protection of relief staff, rescue workers and aid agencies.

Pray that the appeals for help and financial support will be met with a fast and generous response across the world.

Biblefresh and Unity

I've copied the following from an email I received from Steve Clifford, the General Director of the EA UK. Alexandra is one of the great team at EAUK helping to coordinate the biblefresh initiative for 2011. As you read this, remember to come along to the biblefresh Scotland consultation on 25th Jan, 2 pm at the ICC in Glasgow.

The Bible: tedious, taboo and toxic... or transforming, treasured and true?

‘I met Msizi in the rural outskirts of Mpophomeni - a township near Durban, South Africa. I was there on my sabbatical last year as part of a team. Msizi did something that will stay with me for the rest of my life. As we handed her a food parcel she took it, put it aside, held out her Bible and said: ‘This is my daily bread’.

Msizi lives in the most basic of homes. Having lost her partner to HIV/Aids two weeks before I met her, she is left to raise four children on her own, whilst battling the disease herself. Yet this woman knows where her true source of nourishment comes from.

Today, the team of nine Brits on that Soul Action project run by Tearfund and Soul Survivor, all at various stages in life, all passionate about providing physical, spiritual and emotional care to the people of Mpophomeni, go on having learnt something from Msizi. To Msizi, the words of the Bible give life.’

This is one of Alexandra Lilley's reflections on her trip to South Africa. Alexandra is our Churches in Missions Project Coordinator and is another member of the Evangelical Alliance who, like you, is passionate about the Bible.

To pursue that common passion, the Alliance is bringing together over 50 different agencies, colleges, denominations and festivals, who work with the Bible but have never partnered all together before. Biblefresh is an initiative to help Christians renew their love for the Scriptures during 2011, the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. Through Biblefresh, we aim to maximise and pool the resources God has provided, to build the Kingdom rather than individual empires.

As Alexandra coordinates stories from across the UK for the Biblefresh book being published in May 2010, her experience validates this truth: ‘We simply cannot experience the fullness of Christ without one another.’

I agree! Without unity, we have a hollow, incomplete experience of faith. It is, after all, Jesus’ heart for us, his people:
‘May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me.’ John 17:3

Bible Fresh Launch

I hope to see you at the bible fresh launch Monday 25 January at the ICC, Glasgow at 2 p.m. finished by 4 p.m.

Krish Kandiah will speak on bible fresh and there will be a real consultation about how we in Scotland can make best use of this opportunity to transform our nation through the bible.

EA Idea

The Evangelical Alliance bi-monthly Idea magazine is now available on-line. Idea is a great resourse for info about what's happening and also regularly carries helpful, mission encouraging articles. You can find the on-line version here.

Bible Fresh

Things are beginning to pick up on the Bible Fresh front.

We have a group meeting in Scotland to prepare events and resources for the Bible Fresh initiative in 2011. This year is the 400th anniversary of the publication of the King James Version of the bible, and rather than simply celebrate an old book the plan is to encourage the church and many people to re-engage, or engage for the first time, with the bible for themselves.

There are to be four streams in this national initiative:
Bible reading
Bible experience
Bible training
Bible translation

Just now I'm working on some ideas for using blogs to help us engage with bible reading. Watch out for more news on this exciting project and please do pray for biblefresh: it could change your world.

Stuart Townend - Slipstream podcast

There is another helpful podcast from the Slipstream team at EA. You can download it here.

I've copied the blub to encourage you to listen to this.

Stuart Townend is a well-known Christian songwriter, worship leader, musician and seminar speaker. He also spends time training emerging worship leaders and songwriters. His latest album Creation Sings was released in May 2009.

Here is a taster from Stuart's podcast interview:
If people don't have a mentor or encourager and they want to test out a calling in worship leading, what are some of the recommendations you could make to them?

I think everyone needs pastoral input. Everyone needs someone speaking into what you do in terms of ministry. If you haven't got that, you look for that, not necessarily in someone who is musically massively gifted, but somebody who pastorally can have input into you as a person, and input into how you interact with the church and how you develop resources for the church...But it's important to have some pastoral input - even if it's your local church pastor. I would be very cautious about people who are writing songs who are not connected into a local church, who are not part of that body of believers. First, because I think that if you do develop ministry, you need support; but secondly, that's where you learn what it's all about. You learn what works as a song by trying it out with your local congregation. That's what keeps you sharp in terms of your writing. Otherwise the tendency is you can go off and write songs, but actually they don't work when people sing them because you're not hearing people sing them. You're not learning your trade, if you like, not learning your craft in the local church...

Download the Slipstream Podcast 18: Stuart Townend podcast (Note: Right-Click / Save As...)

Culture Slaves

I thought this week's Friday Night Theology from the EA was interesting. A good example of how to turn a current news story into an opportunity for the gospel.

It's The Son Wot Won It

There may not be that many FNT subscribers who read the Sun on a regular basis but for those that do the question is whether or not they will change their voting intentions now that Britain’s best-selling daily has come out for the Conservatives.
Of course, the response of the Labour party to this has been that “People win elections, not newspapers.” But is that actually true? Following the Sun’s claim in 1992 that they had changed the election outcome, a number of academic studies set out to demonstrate whether or not they had. The result is that it is unclear, though probably unlikely, that they changed the overall result, but what is clear is that newspapers do influence how people vote.

More broadly, it is also clear that a vast range of media outlets, from books to films to magazines to the web, impact how we think and behave on many fronts. So, when Coronation Street portrayed a character dying from cervical cancer, there was a substantial increase in the take up of cervical screening services. More negatively, a report in 2004 found that 40% of people think that half of all crimes are committed by young people despite the reality being much less. Excessive media reporting of youth crime was considered to be the main culprit for this misapprehension.

And yet, despite all this, when people are asked whether they think that the media influences their personal beliefs and choices, the answer is frequently in the negative. In particular, they consider it to have a strong influence on others, but just not on themselves.

What we have then is the strange situation where clearly the media does impact the public but this is not fully acknowledged by that public whose opinion is being swayed. What makes this worse is that the media themselves usually claim that they do not drive public opinion, they merely reflect it.

In response to all this, perhaps the first thing to note is that none of this is new. The apostle Paul warned us: “Do not conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” (Romans 12:2) He knew that we are subject to cultural influences, which is precisely why he actively encouraged us to adopt a different approach: the renewal of our minds in conformity to Christ. Even stronger is 1 John 4:4 which gives us hope that such resistance to cultural patterns is not futile, but can actually succeed: “The one who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world. They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God.”

All of us then, including the church, are prone to social and cultural influences. We may like to think we make our own decisions and form our own beliefs, but the reality is that we swim in a tide of public opinion that is hard to escape. Moreover, subconsciously (if not consciously) we all like to conform. In order, then, to be different we need some other source of knowledge and wisdom to draw upon. That source is, of course, Christ. He provides an alternative base which enables us to think differently from the rest, indeed enables us to think with the mind of God.

So I guess the challenge to our non-Christian friends is to ask whether they want to continue to be slaves to cultural whims, or whether instead they should choose to become slaves of Christ. Whatever else people say about evangelical Christianity, it’s probably the only way to be a cultural rebel these days – and that alone seems a good reason to choose it.

Justin Thacker, Head of Theology

God Isn't Deluded, Even If Dawkins Is!

As we anticipate the publication of another book by Richard Dawkins, described on the cover rather grandly as ‘the most formidable intellect in public discourse’, I share here a section on the Delusion under which Dawkins labours from William Lane Craig. I found this on the EA site, here.

I feel increasing sure that God really isn’t impressed by Dawkins and the so called new atheists.

Dawkin’s Delusion

Richard Dawkins has emerged as the enfant terrible of the movement known as the New Atheism. His best-selling book The God Delusion has become the literary centerpiece of that movement. In it Dawkins aims to show that belief in God is a delusion, that is to say, "a false belief or impression," or worse, "a persistent false belief held in the face of strong contradictory evidence." On pages 157-58 of his book, Dawkins summarizes what he calls "the central argument of my book." Note it well. If this argument fails, then Dawkins's book is hollow at its core. And, in fact, the argument is embarrassingly weak.

It goes as follows:

1. One of the greatest challenges to the human intellect has been to explain how the complex, improbable appearance of design in the universe arises.
2. The natural temptation is to attribute the appearance of design to actual design itself.
3. The temptation is a false one because the designer hypothesis immediately raises the larger problem of who designed the designer.
4. The most ingenious and powerful explanation is Darwinian evolution by natural selection.
5. We don't have an equivalent explanation for physics.
6. We should not give up the hope of a better explanation arising in physics, something as powerful as Darwinism is for biology.
7. Therefore, God almost certainly does not exist.

This argument is jarring because the atheistic conclusion that "therefore, God almost certainly does not exist" seems to come suddenly out of left field. You don't need to be a philosopher to realize that that conclusion doesn't follow from the six previous statements. Indeed, if we take these six statements as premises of an argument intended logically to imply the conclusion "therefore, God almost certainly does not exist," then the argument is patently invalid. No logical rules of inference would permit you to draw this conclusion from the six premises.

A more charitable interpretation would be to take these six statements not as premises but as summary statements of six steps in Dawkins's cumulative argument for his conclusion that God does not exist. But even on this charitable construal, the conclusion "therefore, God almost certainly does not exist" simply doesn't follow from these six steps, even if we concede that each of them is true and justified. The only delusion demonstrated here is Dawkins's conviction that this is "a very serious argument against God's existence."

So what does follow from the six steps of Dawkins's argument? At most all that follows is that we should not infer God's existence on the basis of the appearance of design in the universe. But that conclusion is compatible with God's existence and even with our justifiably believing in God's existence. Maybe we should believe in God on the basis of the cosmological argument or the ontological argument or the moral argument. Maybe our belief in God isn't based on arguments at all but is grounded in religious experience or in divine revelation.

Maybe God wants us to believe in Him simply by faith. The point is that rejecting design arguments for God's existence does nothing to prove that God does not exist or even that belief in God is unjustified. Indeed, many Christian theologians have rejected arguments for the existence of God without thereby committing themselves to atheism. Dawkins's argument for atheism is a failure even if we concede, for the sake of argument, all its steps. But, in fact, several of these steps are plausibly false in any case. Take step 3, for example. Dawkins's claim here is that one is not justified in inferring design as the best explanation of the complex order of the universe because then a new problem arises: Who designed the designer?

This objection is flawed on at least two counts. First, in order to recognize an explanation as the best, one needn't have an explanation of the explanation. This is an elementary point concerning inference to the best explanation as practiced in the philosophy of science. If archaeologists digging in the earth were to discover things looking like arrowheads and hatchet heads and pottery shards, they would be justified in inferring that these artifacts are not the chance result of sedimentation and metamorphosis but products of some unknown group of people even though they had no explanation of who these people were or where they came from. Similarly, if astronauts were to come upon a pile of machinery on the back side of the moon, they would be justified in inferring that it was the product of intelligent, extraterrestrial agents even if they had no idea whatsoever who these extraterrestrial agents were or how they got there. In order to recognize an explanation as the best, one needn't be able to explain the explanation. In fact, so requiring would lead to an infinite regress of explanations so that nothing could ever be explained and science would be destroyed. In the case at hand, in order to recognize that intelligent design is the best explanation of the appearance of design in the universe, one needn't be able to explain the designer.

Second, Dawkins thinks that in the case of a divine designer of the universe, the designer is just as complex as the thing to be explained so that no explanatory advance is made. This objection raises all sorts of questions about the role played by simplicity in assessing competing explanations-for example, how simplicity is to be weighted in comparison with other criteria like explanatory power, explanatory scope, plausibility, and so forth. If a less simple hypothesis exceeds its rivals in explanatory scope and power, for example, then it may well be the preferred explanation despite the sacrifice in simplicity.

But leave those questions aside. Dawkins's fundamental mistake lies in his assumption that a divine designer is an entity comparable in complexity to the universe. As an unembodied mind, God is a remarkably simple entity. As a nonphysical entity, a mind is not composed of parts; and its salient properties-like self-consciousness, rationality, and volition-are essential to it. In contrast to the contingent and variegated universe with all its inexplicable physical quantities and constants (mentioned in the fifth step of Dawkins's argument), a divine mind is startlingly simple. Certainly such a mind may have complex ideas (it may be thinking, for example, of the infinitesimal calculus), but the mind itself is a remarkably simple entity. Dawkins has evidently confused a mind's ideas, which may indeed be complex, with a mind itself, which is an incredibly simple entity. Therefore, postulating a divine mind behind the universe most definitely does represent an advance in simplicity. Other steps in Dawkins's argument are also problematic; but I think enough has been said to show that his argument does nothing to undermine a design inference based on the universe's complexity, not to speak of its serving as a justification of atheism.

Several years ago my atheist colleague Quentin Smith unceremoniously crowned Stephen Hawking's argument against God in A Brief History of Time as "the worst atheistic argument in the history of Western thought."5 With the advent of !e God Delusion the time has come to relieve Hawking of this weighty crown and to recognize Richard Dawkins's accession to the throne.

William Lane Craig is research professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, California. His Ph.D. in Philosophy is from the University of Birmingham in the United Kingdom.

Alpha, The Guardian, NT Wright and the Resurrection

I've copied below the post from Friday Night Theology from the Evangelical Alliance (7/8/09).

It appears that Adam Rutherford who writes for The Guardian is attending an Alpha course and writing of his thoughts on this. In his recent article he strongly questions the historicity of Christianity in general and the resurrection of the body of the Lord Jesus in particular. Bishop Wright offers a brief response to this and points to his two wonderful books - 'The Resurrection of the Son of God' and 'Surprised by Hope'.

I hope you find this helpful, and please do check out the EA site for Friday Night Theology.


Wright on the Resurrection

This week’s ‘special’ FNT first appeared on the Guardian's commentisfree site. It is reproduced here with the permission of Bishop Tom Wright.

Various things could be said of Adam Rutherford's take on the resurrection (apart from the fact that the criticism doesn't seem to be engaging with the central issues, so it's hard to tell whether he's really heard the point or not).
1. The historical basis of Christianity is vital precisely because Christianity isn't just a moral philosophy or a pathway of spirituality, however much many in late western culture (including in the church) have tried to belittle it by treating it as such. Of course sceptics want Christianity to be "simply a moral philosophy". That's not nearly so challenging as what it actually is.
2. The reason many of us refer to the New Testament in dealing with early Christianity is not just that it's "The Bible", but that it's the close-up, often first-hand evidence both for what happened and for what Jesus' first followers made of it all.
3. The historical evidence for Jesus himself is extraordinarily good. I have no idea whether the Alpha teachers have gone into the detail of how we know about things in Palestine in the first century, but the evidence dovetails together with remarkable consistency, as I and many others have shown in works of very detailed historical scholarship. From time to time people try to suggest that Jesus of Nazareth never existed, but virtually all historians of whatever background now agree that he did, and most agree that he did and said a significant amount at least of what the four gospels say he did and said.
4. Just as Christian faith is far more than a moral philosophy or spiritual pathway (though it includes both as it were en passant), so it is more than a "how to get saved" teaching backed up by a dodgy "miracle". Christian faith declares that, in and through Jesus, the creator of the world launched his plan to rescue the world from the decaying and corrupting force of evil itself. This was (if it was anything at all) an event which brought about a new state of affairs, albeit often in a hidden and paradoxical way (as Jesus kept on saying): the "kingdom of God", that is, the sovereign, rescuing rule of the creator, breaking in to creation. If this stuff didn't happen then Christianity is based on a mistake. You can't rescue it by turning it into a philosophy.
5. Of course, this was nonsense in the ancient pagan world, as it is nonsense in the modern pagan world. Nothing new there. The Jewish worldview (in which there is a creator God who has promised to rescue the world, and whose people are somehow a vehicle of this rescue operation) was and is always offensive to pagan worldviews of every sort. The sceptics of today add nothing to the sceptics of the first and second century AD.
6. And, of course, we all know that dead people don't rise. Actually, the early Christians knew that too; they didn't suppose that people did rise from the dead from time to time and that Jesus just happened to be one of them. (The other "raisings" in the NT are of course what we would call "near death experiences" – people who are clinically dead and then find themselves called back.*) Rather, they claimed that Jesus had as it were gone through death and out the other side into a new form of physicality for which there was no previous example and of which there remains no subsequent example. They knew as well as we do how outrageous that was, but they found themselves compelled to say it. As one of the more sceptical of today's scholars has put it, "It seems that they were doing their best to describe an event for which they didn't have the right language."
7. You can't explain how they came to say what they said unless there were both several "sightings" of and meetings with someone they took to be Jesus, alive again, and an empty tomb where he had been. Without the first, they would have said the grave had been robbed. Without the second, they would have known it was a hallucination (they knew as much about those as we do). But if both occurred, how do we explain them? All other explanations fail to account for the reality of what they said and the change in their lives and their sense of call. (Which can't, by the way, be rubbished by likening it to Jones or Koresh; read Acts and compare and contrast with that sort of stuff.)
8. Jesus' resurrection was not, for them, a kind of odd phenomenon which validated a particular atonement theology (though of course all these things are joined up). It isn't an extra thing, bolted on to the outside of a moral philosophy. It is the launching-pad for God's new creation. "Christian spirituality" is learning to live in that new creation. "Christian ethics" is learning to let the power of that new creation shape your life. A Christian political theology is discovering what it means that, through the resurrection, Jesus is the world's true Lord.
9. Ridiculous? Of course. It was in AD 35 and it is today. But actually it makes sense – historically, culturally, philosophically and even dare I say politically. We've tried all sorts of other stuff recently and got fairly stuck, haven't we? But actually that shoulder-shrugging pragmatism, though it might alert people to the fact that normal western scepticism may not have the last word, isn't enough. It is possible to argue historically for the truth of Jesus' resurrection. I and others have done so and the case is remarkably good. But I'm not sure, to be honest, that the writer attending the Alpha course is really interested in the historical argument. If he is, he might look at Surprised by Hope, especially chapters 3 and 4. And if he wants a fuller account, he could tackle The Resurrection of the Son of God.
Tom Wright, Bishop of Durham
*For more details on what Tom Wright means by this, please see his Surprised by Hope (Chapters 3,4) and The Resurrection of the Son of God (pp440ff).

EAUK Friday Night Theology

EAUK do a very helpful Friday Night Theology email and page on their web site - find it here.

This week Susannah Clark has written on the appalling murder of George Tiller. Before our General Assembly I posted about the need to speak respectfully and lovingly towards one another. To murder someone, standing at the door of a church, because you disagree with his position and practice on abortion is an unspeakable evil.
I'm grateful to Susannah for her helpful comments, and I've copied them below. Please join me in praying for Dr Tiller's family, for the congregation where he was worshipping and for the Christian community in the USA where such things can happen.




The Murder of George Tiller

The murder of US late term abortion doctor George Tiller last Sunday, has sparked the debate again between the pro-choice and pro-life camps on both sides of the Atlantic. The murder suspect, Scott Roeder, was a member of a Christian group, albeit an extreme right wing militia group, prompting a Guardian headline, Terror in the name of Jesus.

Sadly, this is not the first violent incident in the US over this issue: to date 15,125 violent acts have been committed towards abortion providers, many carried out supposedly in the name of Jesus. Speaking on Tiller’s murder, Barack Obama said, "However profound our differences as Americans over difficult issues such as abortion, they cannot be resolved by heinous acts of violence." I for one certainly agree with that. And as many commentators have noted, the suspect may have viewed Tiller as a murderer, but murdering the murderer on the basis that you think he is a murderer is surely a contradiction.

While researching this article, I read some stories of women who have had late term abortions. As I read, I felt overwhelming compassion. Most of these are stories of women who have to make agonizing decisions, stories of foetuses with horrendous disabilities, unlikely to live more than a few days, stories of women who longed for a baby. Pro-life arguments against the decision to abort would include that to abort the foetus is to pre-judge God and that only God has the right to give life and take it away. Yet these women have found themselves in harrowing situations that I would not wish on anyone.

Jesus’ actions towards people though were not based on whether or not he endorsed their decisions and behaviour, yet sometimes we seem to think that ours can be. Jesus told us very clearly not to judge people, to examine carefully our own conduct, (Matthew 7:1) and equally clearly, he tells us that we are to love our neighbour (Matthew 22:39). Yet often we rush to make judgments and treat people depending on whether we think they’re right or wrong. In this case, such disagreement has led to violence, murder, abuse and hatred: at both Tiller and women attending his clinic. Such acts have no regard for their common humanity, as people made in the image of God. We may not carry out murder and violence, but how do we treat people whose actions or points of view we disagree with?

Jesus wasn’t afraid to tell people he disagreed with them and he did so out of love, to show them a better way. Sometimes they didn’t respond, but it didn’t mean he ceased to love them. He comforted the hurting, healed the broken, bound up the broken hearted, loved those who felt alone and abandoned, wept with those who were suffering and offered them hope and life. If we believe in a God of love, compassion and mercy, let’s be the first to demonstrate that to people: no matter what they’ve done, or what situation they are facing.

Susannah Clark, Public Theology Researcher

What's next?

Sorry I've not been blogging for a while, I've been at the General Assembly.

I'm sure others will have been blogging about what's happened, I'm more interested in what's next? How can we build, or re build, one Church in our nation?

Today I've been in Glasgow meeting with the Evangelical Alliance Executive together with Steve Clifford and his wife Anne. Steve is the new General Director of the EAUK. It was a good time and I'm very encouraged about the future of the EA in the UK under Steve's leadership.

No doubt I'll be back to blogging about other things soon.

All Things Made New

“That’s one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind.”

These famous words of Neil Armstrong when stepping onto the surface of the moon work just as well if we imagine them being spoken by the Lord Jesus as he steps across the threshold of the now empty tomb.

The resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ makes all things new.

Death is made new in life
They went to the tomb on that Sunday morning looking for a dead man, a body now three days in the tomb. But they didn’t find him. Not because they went to the wrong tomb, no, they knew very well where to go. They didn’t find him because death has been overcome by life. “Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here but has risen.” (Luke 24:5, 6)
Now that one man has risen again from the dead the resurrection has started, the new life of God’s Kingdom is breaking out among us.

Weeping is made new in witness
After a while we find Mary weeping outside the empty tomb (John 20:11). Her tears are wiped away when she meets the now risen Lord who absence has caused her tears. Then Mary “went and announced to the disciples, ‘I have seen the Lord’”. Her tears bear witness to her love for her Lord, her devotion to him. The absence of her tears bear witness to her joy at his resurrection, no more tears, Jesus lives!
The good news of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus is just too good to keep to yourself, it is just made for sharing, for telling everyone.

Doubt is made new in faith
It took a whole week, but Thomas found his doubts replaced with faith. When offered the chance to touch his Lord and feel his glorified wounds Thomas simply falls before him, “My Lord and my God.” (John 20:28)
With his eyes cleared of doubt Thomas can see that this risen Jesus is both Lord and God. His nature, shared with God, is now revealed. That he is King in God’s Kingdom is now declared. Jesus is Lord, Caesar is not (nor is any other human ruler).

One small step – just over this threshold.
A giant leap – God’s King is revealed as God’s Kingdom comes, all things are made new.

Remember - you can visit other resurrection posts:

http://mikeaddis.blogspot.com/

http://blogdyfedwynroberts.blogspot.com/

http://theurbanpastor.wordpress.com/

http://lifefaithetc.blogspot.com/

http://www.meetalancraig.com/

www.knightswoodcongregational.org.uk/blog/

http://www.markmeynell.wordpress.com/

http://www.deeperwaters.wordpress.com/

http://www.bibleandmission.wordpress.com/

http://www.bigcircumstance.com/

http://www.adrianwarnock.com/

http://andybeingachristian.wordpress.com/

http://thesimplepastor.blogspot.com/

EA Slipstream - the Resurrection

Tomorrow there is to be a synchronsied blog on the theme of the Resurrection. This has been organised by the Slipstream team at the Evangelical Alliance UK, visit their homepage here for more information.

I'll be posting on this theme tomorrow, as will the following other blogs, why not have a visit and read what is being posted on the theme of the Resurrection.

http://mikeaddis.blogspot.com

http://blogdyfedwynroberts.blogspot.com/

http://theurbanpastor.wordpress.com/

http://lifefaithetc.blogspot.com

www.meetalancraig.com

www.knightswoodcongregational.org.uk/blog/

www.markmeynell.wordpress.com

www.deeperwaters.wordpress.com

www.bibleandmission.wordpress.com

www.bigcircumstance.com

www.adrianwarnock.com

http://andybeingachristian.wordpress.com

http://thesimplepastor.blogspot.com/

Resurrection Blogging

The EA Slipstream team are inviting bloggers to take part in what is called synchronised blogging on Thursday next week, the 9th of April, Maundy Thursday.
I've copied their email below, the idea is to blog on the theme of the resurrection.


I'll be joining in, why don't you take part also? If you are joining in leave a comment and email the Slipstream team.



Synchronised Blogging Day
Attention all bloggers: in light of our special Easter Slipstream edition, we're asking you to blog about Jesus' resurrection as part of a synchronised blogging day on April the 9th, which is Maundy Thursday. There are no perameters, but if you decide to participate please email us with your blog address at slipstream@eauk.org.

EA Slipstream - new podcast

There is a new podcast from EA Slipstream available to download now.

This podcast features Tim Hughes, Director of Worship at Holy Trinity Brompton Church in London. He is also a songwriter with Survivor Records and heads up Worship Central, a worship training resource. He is married to Rachel and they have two children (including a newborn!).

Visit this site and give it a listen, well worth your time.

Ten Blogging Commandments

Over on What's Next, Krish Kandiah was blogging on a Radio 4 programme, God.com, and gave a link to the Ten Blogging Commandments. I enjoyed reading them and though it worthwhile copying the link here for others to look up.

EA Slipstream Podcast

There's a new podcast available from EA as part of their Slipstream programme.

Ruth Valerio, who runs A Rocha's Living Lightly 24:1 initiative speaks on environmental issues. A good podcast, one to share with young people who are very engaged in environmental concerns.