the Way?

The road less travelled

☰

Done with religion, done with God?

May 30th, 2023 in Why believe?. Tags: , , ,

The number of people in English-speaking countries who say the have no religion has risen over the past few decades, with younger people being especially likely not to believe (see note 1 for some statistics).

According to this report, the most common stated reason for no longer being religious was intellectual – people came to the conclusion that their previous beliefs were unscientific, illogical or childish. (For other reasons, see note 2.)

I believe we don’t have to give up our faith for intellectual reasons, even if we choose to give up on the church. This post explains why.

It depends what you focus on

There are many reasons to believe in christianity, and many reasons to doubt or disbelieve.

It seems that many people are inclined to focus on what they want to be true, and so they tend to see the reasons that support their preference and miss the reasons that challenge their preference. This can be true for both believers and unbelievers.

It is helpful to look at both sides of the question and recognise the things that both support and undermine my belief. In this post we’ll look at the reasons our christian faith can be strong even when we have doubts, and in the next post we’ll check out how we might deal with some of the challenges.

Can you believe these conclusions?

There are a number of facts and experiences that we will find difficult to explain unless there is a God who cares for people. These facts build on each other to show why we can reasonably keep on believing.

1. Can you believe in an autonomous universe?

Galaxy

If there’s no God then how can we explain the existance of our amazing universe?

Can you believe all this vast array of galaxies and stars, all this energy, the amazing extent of space and time, all appeared out of nothing and for no reason?

Likewise it is hard to believe that it has always existed, for if it started an infinite time ago, everything that could ever happen would have happened long before now.

Furthermore, the universe is held together by physical laws that will only work if a bunch of physical values (like the size and charge on fundamental particles, the value of the various fundamental forces, and so on) are within extremely fine ranges. Physicists have estimated that the probability of this happening by random chance is infinitessimal.

The only scientific explanation for this improbability – that there may be very many universes, and we are just the “lucky” one – doesn’t really change anything for me, because such a remarkable “multiverse” seems just as unlikely as our remarkable universe.

1. So these facts point to a creator God who made the universe for a purpose.

2. Can you believe people are purely physical?

If there’s no God, the world and everything in it must be purely physical, because what is there in atoms and energy to create anything else?

But it is hard to believe human beings are purely physical, and most people can’t really live as if that were true.

No free will?

For if we are purely physical, then there is nothing going on in our brains, and nothing controlling our brains, except physical processes. And we know how physical processes work, according to quite strict laws. Chemical processes and electrical signals work according to laws, and there is nothing else in there. Any choice we make is determined by those physical processes.

So without God, it is hard to see how anyone can choose anything except what those physical processes determine, for they are us, there’s nothing more.

Can you believe that? I can’t, because it doesn’t accord with our experience.

And it is self-contradictory, because the conclusion that there is no God would be determined by those processes rather than by the truth.

No logic?

What’s more, if our brain processes are determined by physics, then it is hard to see how we can reliably think logically. Our attempt at logical reasoning will be at the mercy of physical processes which know nothing about logic. And if that was so, how could we could believe our own brains?

No right & wrong?

Also, human society requires that we all can live together in peace most of the time, otherwise each group or tribe would be dysfunctional and would easily fall prey to other groups. So our societies evolve ethical values and laws which aim to keep everything working efficiently and peacefully. Such values don’t need to be objectively “right”, they just need to work.

But the strange thing is, most of us can’t help think some of these values are really objectively true. Most of us strongly feel that killing or torturing babies, grandmas, and most likely anyone, is repugnant and really wrong. And if we don’t think that, we’d probably be considered a psychopath.

So most of us naturally recoil from the idea that there’s no true right and wrong. But if there’s no God, what can make moral values and laws actually true?

People must be more than physical

So if we believe humans really do have free will, the ability to reason and the ability to make truly moral choices, and because a purely physical world doesn’t allow for freewill, reason and ethics, it is inconsistent to stop believing in God and trying to live as if he or she isn’t there.

2. So the creator God seems to have wanted human beings to evolve to have genuine autonomy and choice, know right and wrong, and be able to think logically.

3. The things that happen to people

Some people have amazing experiences which seem to come from beyond this physical world:

  • people pray and ask God for healing, and while often they don’t receive what they ask for, sometimes they do, in ways that medical science cannot explain;
  • some people seem to experience God speaking to them or appearing to them in a vision, and this often changes their lives dramatically;
  • others have an overwhelming experience of the divine, where they feel love and peace and a sense of awe, and this too has strong and beneficial effects in their lives;
  • and without any fanfare or anything dramatic, millions of people experience what seems to them to be God guiding them, comforting them, changing their lives and lifting them out of negativity and hurtful emotions and experiences.

It would be easy to dismiss these experiences as being evidence of weak minds and fanciful thinking, but studies show that most people who have these experiences have good mental health.

Can you believe that every one of these apparent experiences of God is a result of imagination or an unhealthy mind? Surely there are too many healings which defy medical expectations? Too many people’s lives are changed in positive ways?

So although I’ve never had an experience that was obviously more than “natural”, and although I’m sure many of these experiences can be explained in other ways, I cannot make myself discount them all or explain every last one of them away. You too may be led to believe that God is the source of many of these.

3. So it seems that the personal creator God really cares for us and wants to interact with us.

(The evil and suffering in the world throws doubt on this conclusion. I’ll address this in the next post.)

4. I can’t dismiss Jesus

Jesus was arguably the most influential person who ever lived. The originator of the world’s biggest religion. An inspiration to so many people who have set up hospitals, aged care facilities, schools and aid and development programs. (And yes, some have killed and done evil in his name, but they clearly weren’t following his teachings.)

He challenged the status quo, healed, gave respect to those who were disrespected by their society (women, lepers, tax collectors, prostitutes) and inspired people with his ethical teachings. He hated hypocrisy, stood against the prevailing power structures, but loved and mixed with the common people, who loved him in return.

And when he was executed, his followers said they had seen him alive again, and this belief motivated them to set out to change the world. Which they did.

The historians generally affirm that the stories we have about him are based on history, and I cannot believe otherwise.

It is hard to believe he lied or was totally mistaken about who he said he was – God’s agent on earth. We can’t easily dismiss his teachings and say all the stories about him are false.

We can be strengthened in this conclusion by the fact that the God all this evidence points to looks quite consistent with the God Jesus taught us about.

I am further encouraged in this belief by the fact that Jesus is the person I would choose to follow. Compassionate to those who are struggling, tough on those who oppress, strong on justice and love, and with a clear vision of the world he wants to see.

4. So it seems that the loving creator God really did reveal himself to us through Jesus, so we wouldn’t have to die wondering.

The evidence leads us

So the evidence takes us on a journey that points me to the God of Jesus:

  1. Facts point to a creator God who made the universe for a purpose.
  2. The creator God seems to have wanted human beings to evolve to have genuine autonomy and choice, know right and wrong, and be able to think logically.
  3. The personal creator God really cares for us and wants to interact with us.
  4. The loving creator God really did reveal himself to us through Jesus, so we wouldn’t have to die wondering.

So if you are having doubts, if you wonder if you can keep on the faith journey, I encourage you to ponder, and pray about, the alternative. To consider the evidential difficulties of moving away from belief in God.

We can’t always have certainty about what we believe, but we CAN choose the most likely.

Difficulties and doubts

This evidence counters many of the doubts. The doubts remain, but they can be seen in a different light.

Check out my next post to see how I assess them.

Note 1:

  • Andy Tix says that in the US, those with no religion went from  5% in 1972 to 29% in 2022.
  • The Guardian reports that for those under 40 in Britain, almost 40% more have no religion than those who are Christians. Wikipedia says more than half Britons have no religion, although some of these still believe in a God or higher power.
  • Australian Census data shows about 40% now have no religion, up from 22% only a decade ago.

Note 2:

The main problems were:

  • Intellectual (52%)
  • Unwillingness to be part of an organisation that traumatised people, e.g. LGBTQI people (22%)
  • Personal adversity that didn’t fit with their beliefs (15%)
  • Social – they didn’t fit in with a religious community (11%)

Main graphic adapted from Ethan Wilkinson and Brady Knoll. Other graphics: Andromeda galaxy (NASA), woman with fruit (Pexels), silhouette against night sky (Bryce Bradford via Compfight cc) and Jesus’ feet (unknown).

Related Posts

Do we want fewer abortions?

Unexpected facts
May 14th, 2023 in Changing the world, Culture. Tags: , , , ,

Abortion rights have been an inflamable issue among christians and feminists (and others) in first world countries. But one thing both sides can surely agree on – it would be better if there were fewer abortions.

Whether we believe that abortion is taking a human life, or we want to avoid what can be a medically dangerous or traumatic procedure, or both, it would be better if fewer women were seeking an abortion.

So what policy works best to achieve this?

It turns out that we could reduce abortion rates significantly with improved approaches to contraception, while punitive anti abortion laws have no significant impact in reducing the number of abortions, but instead cause more maternal deaths.

Strong restrictions?

Some countries, and some states in the US, have put in place strong anti-abortion laws, restricting when an abortion can be performed, and sometimes why it can be requested. Doubtless many believe that this will reduce the number of abortions.

Pro-choice activists, on the other hand, sometimes say that the tougher the laws, the more abortions actually occur.

So which side is right?

It turns out that legal restrictions on abortion make virtually no difference on average to the per capita abortion rates (see note 1 for a comment on the data).

Restrictive laws don’t reduce abortion rates

Worldwide about 60-70 million abortions occur each year (Refs 1, 4, 6) – 60% of unwanted pregancies and 30% of all pregnancies end in termination (Ref 6). Abortion rates per population are statistically the same in countries with restrictive laws as they are in those with permissive laws (Refs 2, 3, 4).

Globally, abortion rates (per population) are falling in countries where abortion is broadly legal (generally developed counties with wider access to contraceptives), but rising slightly in countries where it is restricted. Overall, they are falling (Refs 1, 4, 8).

Abortion rates in the US have been at an all-time low in recent years. As with the world, the US states with restrictive abortion laws have similar abortion rates, on average, to those with permissive laws (Refs 2, 9b).

The reason why

The reasons are simple. Government which enact strict laws against abortions usually also don’t support the easy availability of contraception. So their jurisdictions tend to have much higher rates of unplanned pregnancies. So the greater difficulty in obtaining an abortion is balanced by the greater number of women seeking it.

Education and contraception reduce abortion rates

Making contraception easily available, accompanied by education in its use, is the one proven method of reducing abortions (Refs 11-13). Making contraception free of charge is especially effective because the most reliable methods of birth control are too expensive for poorer people (Ref 10). Free contraception can reduce teen pregnancy to about a quarter (Ref 10).

Unintended consequences?

The main effect of restricting access to abortion is to make it less safe for those who nevertheless make the decision to terminate a pregnancy, because medical treatment is of lower quality (Ref 12). Almost half of all abortions worldwide are considered to be unsafe, most of them in developing countries, making unsafe abortions a leading cause of maternal deaths (Ref 6).

Developed vs developing countries

The vast majority of unintended pregnancies and abortions worldwide occur in developing countries (Refs 1, 4), principally because of the lesser availability of affordable contraception and education.

So how to achieve fewer abortions?

Clearly the best way to reduce abortions is to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies. Ready access to affordable or free birth control, accompanied by education, is the best way to achieve this.

Pro-life demonstration

Abortion and christians

Most christians believe abortion is taking a human life, and so are opposed to legalising abortion. But if they truly want to reduce the number of abortions, and so save lives (as they see it), opposition to abortion must be accompanied by improved sex education and easier access to birth control.

And if they are concerned about human lives worldwide, they will support birth control and education in developing countries.

A question of morality?

These facts place pro life christians in a dilemma.They oppose abortion but also probably believe sex outside of marriage is wrong. And they will likely feel that expanding contraception will promote sexual activity, which they think is immoral. So they will probably be unwilling for birth control to be freely available on moral grounds.

I think there are two clear responses to this view:

1. Support the greatest good.

Surely the taking of a human life is a greater moral evil than extra-marital sex? So surely a conservative christian should support the approach which saves lives as they see it, even if it opens up sexual activity they believe is immoral? It isn’t our task to try to control other people’s immoral behaviour, but it is our task to save and enhance life.

2. It isn’t that simple

It seems obvious that contraception must make it easier to have sex with fewer consequences and so increase sexual activity. But that may not be the case. Studies suggest that access to birth control may not have that effect, and may even make women more responsible (Ref 14). As an added benefit, access to birth control seems to be associated with an increase in gender equality and the time women spend in education (Ref 15).

A personal view

I don’t feel comfortable with abortions, for I think we can’t really know whether a foetus is a human being in God’s eyes, or not, and I’d prefer not to take the chance. I recognise that others see this differently.

But ready access to birth control and a greater focus on women’s health without punitive anti abortion laws seems to lead to the best outcomes – fewer abortions, better wellbeing for women and greater gender equality.

They are all outcomes that I as a christian support.

Case study: Netherlands

The following is often quoted, but some of the statistics are inaccurate, so I have corrected it.

“In the Netherlands, abortion is freely available on demand. Yet the Netherlands boasts the lowest abortion rate in the world [actually the 12th lowest according to Ref 5], and the complication and death rates for abortion are minuscule. How do they do it?

First of all, contraception is widely available and free – it’s covered by the national health insurance plan. Holland also carries out extensive public education on contraception, family planning, and sexuality.

Of course, some people say that teaching kids about sex and contraception will only encourage them to have lots of sex. But Dutch teenagers tend to have less frequent sex, starting at an older age, than American teenagers, and the Dutch teenage pregnancy rate is 6 times lower than in the US [actually it is a quarter as high].”

Sources: iFunny, Contraception in The Netherlands: the low abortion rate explained.
Corrections: World Population Review (Ref 5), Lead Stories, Guttmacher Institute.

References

  1. Abortion rates go down when countries make it legal: report. NBC News, 2018.
  2. Abortion restrictions don’t lower rates, report says. CNN Health, 2018.
  3. Do restrictive abortion laws actually reduce abortion? A global map offers insights. NPR, 2022.
  4. Unintended Pregnancy and Abortion Worldwide. Guttmacher Institute, 2022.
  5. Abortion Rates by Country 2023. World Population Review, 2023.
  6. Abortion. World Health Organisation., 2021.
  7. What the data says about abortion in the U.S. Pew Research Centre, 2023.
  8. How the U.S. compares with the rest of the world on abortion rights. PBS News Hour, 2022.
  9. U.S. Abortion Statistics and State Abortion Statistics. Abort783.com, 2023.
  10. Free Birth Control Cuts Abortion Rate by 62 Percent. Live Science, 2022.
  11. 11 Ways to Safely Reduce Abortions Without Removing Access. GoodGoodGood, 2022.
  12. Reducing Unintended Pregnancy and Unsafely Performed Abortion Through Contraceptive Use. PRB, 2009.
  13. Contraceptive Use Is Key to Reducing Abortion Worldwide. Guttmacher Institute, 2003.
  14. No, Birth Control Doesn’t Make You Have Riskier Sex, Researchers Say. Time, 2017.
  15. Trends in sexual activity and demand for and use of modern contraceptive methods in 74 countries: a retrospective analysis of nationally representative surveys. E Slaymaker et al, The Lancet, 2020.

Note 1: Information on abortion rates is very approximate in some countries where abortion is illegal, for obvious reasons. Some of the data has to be estimated indirectly Thus different assessments produce slightly different results. But the broad conclusions I report on here seem reliable.

Main graphic: Abortion rights activists in Sao Paulo, Brazil (Wikipedia). Second graphic: Fifth Paris March for Life, 2009 (Wikipedia).

Related Posts

Can doing evil sometimes be good?

April 19th, 2023 in Changing the world. Tags: , , , , ,
Violence at Belfield

A bunch of people were attending a meeting in a church in Sydney, not a church service, but a meeting to discuss gender politics and impacts on children. There were some protesters there too.

Then things turned ugly and a mob attacked with glass bottles and rocks. People screamed and swore, a woman was punched. Police were called to the “violent confrontation” (police words) and whisked the victims to safety. Several of the violent mob were arrested on the night, or later.

Some christians say they are starting to feel persecuted.

Except….

In this case, the violent mob were the (supposed) christians, several hundred of them. And the victims were a small group (15) of LGBTQI protesters that the police said were “peaceful”.

The basic facts

  • The meeting was organised by the local Catholic church so their parishioners could hear speakers discuss Catholic schools, religious freedom, gender issues and parental rights.
  • One of the speakers was Mark Latham, an outspoken politician from a conservative political party who has expressed strong opinions against LGBTQI activism. There were other less divisive speakers.
  • Hundreds of people attended the event peacefully.
  • A small group (about 15) of protesters from an LGBTQI support group, Community Action for Rainbow Rights (CARR), gathered to protest against the views of Mark Latham. Their protest was apparently peaceful, although it has been claimed they “desecrated a crucifix”.
  • A couple of hundred people gathered outside, apparently to counter the CARR protest, and it was this group that turned violent. It seems that some text messages called for aggressive confrontation to remove the protesters. Some of the language used was violent and crude.
  • The church later condemned their actions and said they had no association with the church. There was some claim that they blocked entry to the church, but this seems unlikely with only 15 protesters.
  • Police were called and led the protester group away for their own protection. At least 3 of the violent mob were arrested and one has since apologised.

Lots of questions

It is easy to take sides on the actions of the various groups involved. The church had every right to hold the meeting, whether we agree with their views or not. The LGBTQI protesters had every right to protest, provided they didn’t disrupt other people too much. The counter protesters likewise had the right to express a view, provided they too didn’t disrupt others or act violently (which unfortunately they did).

But all that is pretty obvious. My interest is in what this incident, and many other less violent disagreements, say about how christian belief and practice is evolving in first world communities. I have many questions.

Is christian identification becoming a political weapon?

For some people, does christian identification have little or nothing to do with Jesus and his teachings, and is all about a political, national or idealogical tribe?

January 6 riot at Capitol

This seemed particularly to be the case with the MAGA riot at the US Capitol 2 years ago, where “Trump” signs, US flags and Jesus rhetoric were very mixed.

Does it happen in less violent ways too? Have right wing political idealogues worked out ways to press conservative christians’ buttons and get them onside on many issues that are not christian?

Should christians be so concerned about LGBTQI rights?

Is there really an agenda around gay and trans rights to corrupt youth? Can a person’s sexuality and gender choices be so easily compromised? And if sometimes they can, are there better ways to protect vulnerable children? What exactly do we think they are vulnerable to?

There seems to be little recognition by conservative christians that LGBTQI people have suffered, been discriminated against, subject to violence and even murdered in days gone by. And even in the present. Could protests against them continue the hurt? Could christians find more loving ways to express their personal views?

And is gender at the core of christian ethics? Are not pride or materialism or violence at least as important? Does a moralistic focus on sexuality and gender divert attention away from these other issues? Are christians focusing on the targets that God is most concerned about?

And why the emphasis on trans people? What Biblical or ethical command are they contravening?

Is choice God’s way?

Should christians in democratic countries oppose other people’s choices if they disagree with them? What are christians afraid of?

Does God really want us to take away people’s freedom of choice if we can? When is that right in a democratic society?

A democracy is built on freedom of choice provided it doesn’t harm others. Have conservative christians demonstrated how gender and sexuality issues cause harm in society?

What place does force and threat have in christian public ethics?

Most of us accept that police and the law are necessary components in a peaceful society. So is there a place for violent behaviour by christians? Do the ends justify violent or threatening means?

Jesus said to love our enemies and pray for them, not threaten them. Should christians withdraw their support for movements that use threatening rhetoric or support violent behaviour?

Can evil methods be used to achieve supposedly good outcomes?

It seems that truth is often missing in more extreme politics these days. It probably always has been, but modern methods of persuasion via social and electronic media seem to have become more sophisticated. Have we christians learnt to recognise when we are being manipulated, and do we care enough about truth to be willing to change our minds when necessary?

Does allegiance to our tribe matter more than truth?

So we see the claim of a stolen presidential election in the US being made and repeated and use to justify extreme actions without any credible evidence being offered. (We have even seen a billion dollar court case accept that lies were told by Fox.) We see voter suppression, gerrymandering and obviously false propaganda such as Tucker Carlson’s edited film of the Capitol riot all being naively accepted by christians.

Do christians need to be “as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves” (Matthew 10:16) in this matter? Can we support such dishonest behaviour and still follow Jesus who is “the truth”?

Should we be suspicious of a fear-based response?

The Bible says hundreds of times to “fear not”. God’s spirit doesn’t make us fearful (2 Timothy 1:7). Surely we should learn to be suspicious of those who urge us to act out of fear – whether fear of a “rainbow agenda”, socialism or the loss of religious feedom?

What things should we truly fear, or be wary of, and what things are manipulated fears to hold our allegiance?

Is christianity inherently political?

Some christians believe that we should focus on “the gospel” and avoid politics. Is this right? Are these sometimes the same people concerned about the rainbow agenda?

Historians say the early christian proclamation that “Jesus is Lord” was inherently political, setting Jesus up against Caesar. So if christianity has political implications, which politics will we support? Which politics is closest to the teachings of Jesus?

Perfect love casts out fear (1 John 4:18). So should we look for a politics of love, acceptance and service rather than fear, individual rights and force?

The Capitol rioters set up a mock gallows and chanted “Hang Mike Pence!” But shouldn’t christian politics be based on the cross of service rather than the gallows of force?

The extremes affect the moderate

Extreme views and behaviour impact on us all. They can make us inured to violence and hateful rhetoric. They can make forceful behaviour feel “normal”.

And they can make us feel fearful, concerned that our religious freedoms and rights are under threat. And then lead us to respond in ways that lack faith.

But they can also polarise, turn people away. In particular, young adults, young voters, who have come thorugh the school system have been taught to be more accepting and less judgmental about people who are different, whether by gender, sexual orientation, race, disability or anything else. Is that tolerance why gender teaching in schools is one of the conservative targets?

Not all live out those values, but many do. If christians can’t find a way to be equally tolerant, or to be more loving, we will cut ourselves off from half a generation.

There are two contrasting movements in christianity today

We christians have a choice.

To support violent and fearful rhetoric, divisive and intolerant attitudes, and allow them to be the way Jesus is represented in our society.

Or to react against fear and force and turn away from organisations that support it, and follow the serving, peaceful, loving way of Jesus.

We will still face difficult decisions. We’ll still have to address complex issues.

But if our heart attitude is right and we pray for the Spirit’s guidance, we’ll be doing things God’s way, not the failed human way.

“The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world.“ (2 Corinthians 10:4)

Background

Main photo: Violence outside a Catholic church in Sydney forces police to intervene and make arrests. The photo is from The Catholic Weekly; it is a composite of two stills taken from video footage on Twitter. I believe using this here is fair use for the reporting of news, and therefore acceptable.
Storming of the United States Capitol, Tyler Merbler, in Wikipedia.

Related Posts

Fears and aspirations revealed in art

April 1st, 2023 in Culture. Tags: , , , ,

Art can reveal and evoke deep thoughts and emotions. Art by talented and thoughtful final year high school students in Sydney (Australia) shows how the coming generations feel about themselves, their families, the world and the future.

Their ideas, and how they are presented, are impressive. They seem to have aspirations that would take the world to a better place than our present leaders are taking it.

And I can’t help feeling that the church could learn a lot about its own mission by listening and looking.

Art Express

Final year students in New South Wales can elect to do art as a subject. Part of the requirements are that they produce a major work. This can be painting or photography or other form of visual art, a sculpture, structure or model, or a video, or maybe a montage or collage.

Those works judged the best or most interesting are exhibited for several months in several venues around the state under the name Art Express. One of the venues is near where we live, so every year we check it out.

The exhibits include the students’ outlines of the motivation and inspiration behind their work, which allows us the get further insights into what is important for these emerging adults.

Major themes

Heritage & self

Many students reflect on their life and family, and their future, which they may see through a lens of hope or concern. Because many Australians come from overseas, from many different countries and cultures, many students value their connection with the past lives of parents and grandparents. At a time in their lives where they may feel quite introspective, vulnerable and uncertain, family provides security for many.

Environment

Many artworks express a concern about our world and its future. Climate change is an important issue for them, as is loss of species and habitat. Many feel our responsibility as humans to care for our fellow earth-dwellers. This year one student expressed these concerns by drawing a bee that required a gas mask to avoid pesticide sprays, a polar bear needing diving gear because of ice melt, and an Australia koala wearing a bushfire fighting helmet (many koalas perished in devastating record fires in Australia 3 years ago).

Animals in protective gear

The artists also expressed concern and appreciation of our built environment. This intricate 3-D model, made essentially from cardboard scraps, was a wonder to view from every angle.

Justice & compassion

Tony Campolo said youth is made for heroism, because they can be idealistic, see issues with raw clarity, and feel galvanised to act. Australia’s treatment of refuigees, inaction on climate change, and the harm people can do to each other are subjects of concern to many. “Collateral Damage” from 2021 expressed one student’s compassion for children displaced, injured and traumatised by conflict, especially in the Middle East. This graphic shows three of seven children she portrayed.

Personal ethics & religion

Some artists choose to reflect some of their responses to religious and more personal ethical questions. A striking work this year addressed four aspects of life that the artist regarded as vices, portraying them as goddesses. Two of them were a Kali-like goddess portraying greed, and a portrayal of vulnerable sexuality with Venus sheltering in a womb while offering temptation.

Listening

Every year I come away from Art Express appreciative of the thought and skill behind all the works on display, and better understanding the concerns of these artists.

And slightly frustrated that the church can seem shallow in comparison, focusing too often on gender and sex, and religious freedom, while giving insufficient attention to the weighty matters that concern these school-leavers, like greed, violence, identity and security.

Jesus’ good news of the kingdom of God addresses all of life, and has plenty to say on greed, violence, identity and security. If we were presenting the good news well, this generation would know there is hope where they now feel concern or anxiety, and an ethical and truthful basis for living in ways that address these issues.

Surely we need to listen, and answer the questions and concerns that people feel rather than the questions and concerns we think they ought to be feeling, or the ones of decades ago?

Graphics are my own photos of Art Express works over a 9 year period, and are used with the permission of Art Express.

Related Posts

How to be an unbalanced christian

March 22nd, 2023 in Church. Tags: , , , ,
Man breakdancing

Its pretty obvious that the world thrives on difference.

We can see it in the climate, where temperature differences lead to differences in air pressure, so we have wind.

We see it in ecology, where an ecosystem is made up of different plants and animals, each playing its part in sustaining that ecosystem. Take one element out and often the system becomes unbalanced and unsustainable.

And we see it in effective organisations, which need different skills to function. Organisations need administrators and leaders and ideas people and strategists and organisers and people who reliably do the work.

What about churches?

A church is an organisation of people which needs different gifts. It is like an ecosystem where taking one part out can leave the system unbalanced.

There are different ways to think of the elements that are required for a balanced and sustainable church:

Word: We have beliefs that make up the core of our faith, and we need to understand them, be able to explain them and learn how to apply them in our lives. And we want others to believe them too.

Spirit: Being a christian isn’t just intellectual, but its also relational and spiritual. We need to love God whole-heartedly, to be devoted to him and empowered by His Spirit.

Action: The church doesn’t exist to wallow in God’s goodness. We exist to love our neighbours, to serve them, care for them and work for justice for them.

Community: Churches are meant to be places where friendship, fellowship, empathy and caring for each other are experienced by all.

Church goals

If you look at the written goals and programs of most churches, you’ll find that they generally reflect all these in some way. For example, Rick Warren’s famous five purposes were worship, fellowship, discipleship, ministry, and mission, which sort of cover Word-Spirit-Action-Community.

Unbalanced churches?

But do you see this balance reflected in most church’s activities and emphases? I’m afraid I’m not seeing it much.

  • Some churches are hard-core in their doctrine and teaching. Long sermons which dot every I and cross every T in explaining why their beliefs are right and others are wrong. They take a very conservative view of the Bible, and women probably aren’t allowed to preach. Their worship is likely to consist of doctrinal songs, and they may believe caring for the poor is the “social gospel”. They tend to be quiet and serious. These churches are most likely Reformed or Conservative Evangelical, or both.
  • Some churches are big on worship. They have great worship bands and lively prayer meetings. They call on the Holy Spirit to fill them, empower them, lead them and thrill them. They tend to be noisy and fun. Their senior pastor is likely to be dynamic and spiritual. Their sermons are likely to be practical and life-oriented rather than doctrinal, and their Bible teaching may be idiosynchratic and not at all interested in the Greek. These churches are likely to be Pentecostal or charismatic.
  • Other worship oriented churches are strong on liturgy, and music that expresses the majesty of God. They may use vestments, candles, rituals which communicate in non-verbal ways and express our dependence on a “wholly other” God.
  • Other, generally more progressive, churches, care more about obeying Jesus in life than worship or doctrine. They will probably be more sensitive to indigneous people, LGBTQI people and social justice issues. They will likely have programs to feed the poor or provide for the homeless. They are likely to be anti-war and anti-materialist. They treat women equally and their pastors may well be women.
  • Some churches are big on evangelism. Their services are visitor friendly. They hold “outreach” activities and teach their members how to witness to their friends. They offer people opportunities to turn to Jesus almost every service and every activity.
  • And some churches (especially house churches) are big on fellowship and caring for each other. But they may become introspective and self-focused.

We can see strengths in every one of these different types of churches, but we can also see weaknesses. Some churches manage to combine several of these emphases, but it isn’t common to find ones that balance them all.

Not many churches are equally strong on Word, Spirit, Action and Community.

Unbalanced christians?

This makes for unbalanced christians. We tend to take on the characteristics of the church we attend.

Or perhaps, more likely, we choose to attend a church that fits our temperament. Academic and intellectual christians tend to gather in Word-oriented churches. Spiritual people in Spirit-oriented churches. Activists in Action-oriented churches.

We tend to reinforce each other. But it leads to less balanced churches. And less balanced christians.

A radical concept

Maybe we should try to attend a church that is different to our natural tendency, even if it makes us feel uncomfortable sometimes? Maybe we could benefit from the gifts and perspectives of christians who are different to us?

I have found this to be true.

I am more of an academic type christian. I like to read non-fiction books by experts on New Testament history, cosmology, archaeology and neuroscience. My faith is very much in my head and not so much in my heart.

But I have been deeply enriched by attending charismatic and Pentecostal churches, even though sometimes they are a bit of a freakout, and sometimes their doctrine is flaky. And I have learned much by attending progressive churches and being challenged by their love and concern for the welfare of others.

Maybe we should embrace being uncomfortable!?

Maybe we can learn and be challenged by people different to us? And learn tolerance and acceptance when they do things we find unusual and maybe even problematic?

And if you are a church leader, perhaps you could identify which of Word, Spirit, Action and Community your church is weakest in and find ways to strengthen it. Maybe even appointing staff or leaders who are different to you?

Photo by Allan Mas

Related Posts

Wealth inequality is killing the poor

February 6th, 2023 in Changing the world. Tags: , , , , ,
Contrast of rich and poor women

Jesus said the poor would always be with us. But he also said we would be judged by how we treated them.

Right now, anti-poverty organisation Oxfam has found that the super rich are getting richer while the poor are getting poorer. Those who need it most are getting less while those who need it least are getting more.

The inequality is killing the poor. And the solution is easy.

Those of us who follow Jesus have no choice but to support the poor in getting justice. Read on to see how.

Did you know?

Here are some global facts about wealth and inequality (from Oxfam):

  • Since 2020, the richest 1% have captured almost two-thirds of all new wealth – nearly twice as much money as the bottom 99% of the world’s population. For every dollar of new global wealth gained by someone in the bottom 90%, one of the world’s billionaires has gained $1.7m.
  • Billionaire fortunes are increasing by $2.7bn a day, even as inflation outpaces the wages of at least 1.7 billion workers, meaning they are less able to pay for food and shelter.
  • Food and energy companies more than doubled their profits in 2022, paying out $257bn to wealthy shareholders, while over 800 million people went to bed hungry.
  • Only 4 cents in every dollar of tax revenue comes from wealth taxes. Large tax cuts for the rich over the past few decades have led to the richest 1% of the world significantly increasing their wealth.
  • The poorest countries are spending four times more repaying debts than on healthcare.

The face of inequality

Elon Musk, one of the world’s richest men, paid a ‘true tax rate’ of just over 3% from 2014 to 2018. Jeff Bezos, head of Amazon, pays 1% tax.

Meanwhile, Aber Christine, a market trader in Northern Uganda who earns $80 a month selling rice, flour and soya, pays a tax rate of 40%.

Does God care? Should we care?

Jesus was critical of the wealthy who ignored the plight of the poor. We can see this in his parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31) and his statement “woe to you who are rich, for you have already received your comfort” (Luke 6:24).

And he said we would be judged by how we treated the poor and suffering: “Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me” (Matthew 25:45).

His brother James is even stronger in calling for justice for the poor (James 5:1-5):

“Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. …… The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.”

Luxury yacht.

Diverting our attention

Some of the rich and powerful have perfected the art of diverting our attention away from the way unjust tax and other economic laws have increased their wealth at our expense.

Raise these issues and you’ll likely be told that these are Marxist ideas (when they are actually Jesus’ ideas). Christians can easily be led to ignore this inequality and the Bible’s teachings, and focus instead on gender, patriotism, individual freedoms, or something else.

We can change this

Oxfam says the answer is simple, and it doesn’t require most of us to give up much at all. Taxes on the super rich have been reduced significantly over recent decades. All the world has to do is increase them just part way back to where they were a few decades ago.

A wealth tax of 2% on the world’s millionaires, 3% on those with wealth above $50m, and 5% on the world’s billionaires would raise $1.7 trillion dollars annually. This would be enough to lift 2 billion people out of poverty, Oxfam says. There’d even be enough to address global emergencies and climate action.

It’s a popular idea

Studies show that increasing taxes for the super rich is popular – in many countries 70%-90% support it. Surprisingly, and encouragingly, some billionaires support it too. Warren Buffett, the world’s fourth richest man, has long supported it (once famously pointing out he was taxed at a lower rate than his secretary). A year ago, over 100 millionaires signed a letter calling for higher taxes.

Economists have found that less equal societies are less stable – more likely to experience economic instability, financial crisis, debt and inflation. Unequal societies are also less harmonious, with higher levels of crime and poorer health.

What you and I can do

  1. Read the Oxfam report – the summary is only 8 pages long.
  2. Vote for politicians and parties who will work towards a fairer tax rate for all.
  3. Support businesses that are equitable, sustainable and just.
  4. Pray for justice in the global economic systems.

Read more

Photos: Woman alighting from plane by Redrecords ©️. Woman carrying a load by ding lei. Luxury yacht image by Jana Martínez from Pixabay

Australia Day and sensitivity towards our indigenous brothers and sisters

Updated and re-posted from 2018
January 26th, 2023 in Changing the world. Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
#ChangeTheHeart

Five years ago we attended a service of lament and support for indigenous christians who cannot celebrate Australia Day with the rest of the country. The service highlighted issues that I think we all wish weren’t there, or would go away.

Last night we watched an online prayer service conducted by Aboriginal christians seeking to #ChangeTheHeart of white Australians towards first nations peoples.

It seems like we white Aussies still have some helpful lessons we can learn.

Continue reading →

The western church needs “something completely different”

January 16th, 2023 in Church. Tags: , , , , ,
Leonid meteor

“It’s no secret that the stars are falling from the sky
It’s no secret that our world is in darkness tonight.”

U2, The Fly

And it’s no secret that the church in the western world has lost credibility, numbers and influence. And that christian faith has been in decline in western countries as a proportion of total population. The statistics are obvious and well-known.

Less obvious is what to do about it. Ignore the “problem” and hope it goes away? Grit our teeth and work even harder? Or rejoice that a moribund organisation is going the way of the dodo and the dinosaur?

I can’t feel any of those responses is adequate. Jesus deserves more. But what to do?

Perhaps we need something completely different?

Perhaps a church that is outward looking, low budget, flexible and open-minded, led by ordinary people, and in tune with the culture around it. If that sounds good to you, read on!

We need something completely different

The church in Europe, North America and Australia & New Zealand has had much the same form for centuries. But it is no longer a sustainable form. Attendances have been falling for years in most western countries. Many churches have closed and the prognosis is poor for many others.

Not only that, the pandemic showed many pastors that their churches hadn’t raised strong disciples – without their weekly church “fix”, many christians were hard-pressed to sustain an active faith.

The current form of church has been described as a SIC model:

  • Sunday-centric. The main public focus is what happens on Sundays.
  • In-drag. The way to grow is to invite people into the christian space.
  • Christendom-form. People meet together in a special (often ancient) building on Sundays. Songs are sung, prayers offered, the Bible read and a sermon or homily given by a trained clergy-person. The same as it has been for centuries.

Trouble is, many people are otherwise occupied on Sundays and the form of activity we are trying to drag them into is quite foreign to them – public singing of unfamiliar songs, sitting and listening to someone speaking at length on topics that may not interest them or be relevant to them, and language, behaviour and ritual that likely make them feel uncomfortable.

Younger people are less likely to attend church, so most churches are ageing, which only leads to one end result.

If we want the church to sustain and grow, something has to change. Albert Einstein is (probably wrongly) reputed to have said: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.”

Why doesn’t the SIC model work?

The current model of church was developed in different times. People were more religious and religion was more respected than now. People didn’t move around so much, so most people attending a particular congregation came from the same culture and the church services could be tailored for that culture.

But now people are more pagan than religious, and come from a “kaleidoscope of diverse and ever-changing micro-cultures”. Even those growing up in the church can find its beliefs and practices difficult; the majority who weren’t raised going to church can find it all baffling and off-putting, or totally irrelevant.

Of course some churches can overcome these deficiencies via a lively community deeply engaged with the surrounding cultures. But the problem is, these churches are in the minority. Worse, the strategy of planting new churches, building new buildings, training new clergy, etc, is slow and costly, and cannot grow at a sustainable pace to even keep up with population growth.

For example, in a city the size of Sydney (population: 5M, growth 1.3% p.a.), it would require a new church with a hundred people attending to be established each week just to keep up with population growth. It isn’t going to happen!

Attendance numbers aren’t the only problem. The decline in discipleship exposed by the pandemic can be in large part attributed to the way the SIC model keeps most people passive, which isn’t conducive to learning and growth.

So what is the answer?

Quantum mission

Book: Quantum MIssion

Most of the ideas I’ve outlined in this post come from a new book by my friend Martin Bragger, a retired minister here in Sydney. Martin has done the research and developed his “something completely different” for the twenty-first century church.

Most importantly, this isn’t theory, as Martin has put his approach into practice over a decade.

He has labelled his approach “Quantum Mission” because “it requires viewing mission in a totally new way”, just as the science of quantum physics has revolutionised physical science.

Five principles

Five key principles shape his approach:

  1. We need to see ourselves as being on a mission and not just living an easy life. (Martin identifies the need for culturally-sensitive evangelism, but I feel he doesn’t give adequately address serving our community, especially the poor and struggling.)
  2. We have to be willing to get out of our christian ghettos and be “embedded” in the cultures around us – “their place, their time, their language and their style”, not ours.
  3. We need to have “cultural intelligence” and be flexible and adaptive, so we learn as we go and change as needed.
  4. Our missional approach has to be small and inexpensive, so it can adapt and morph as culture changes, and so it can multiply rather than grow slowly.
  5. It will need to be led by new, entrepreneurial, mostly lay, leaders, who need a very different kind of training from what paid clergy currently receive.

Missional communities

Martin’s approach is built around small missional comunities, but he refuses to try to give a prescription for these, for they need to adapt to the situation they are in (“Quantum Mission isn’t a formula but a freedom”).

He envisages a network of small groups of people, mixed believers and not-yet-believers, meeting within the “live, work and play” micro-cultures that the participants are part of. The aim isn’t to go “out” and bring converts back into the safety of our religious buildings, but to “go and stay” and continue to be light and salt in the community.

They will serve the community around them in some way, and meet as a simple church – i.e. they share, read the scriptures, pray and encourage each other. Most importantly, they will meet in a location where they are visible and approachable. (Martin has begun such communities in an Aussie pub, in cafes, in clubs.)

These networks could exist quite independently, as Martin’s groups currently are, or be part of a more established “mixed economy” church (i.e. both conventional church and missional communities).

These aren’t easy steps for many of us

For any of this to occur, the new church comprising missional communities will need brave and entrepreneurial leaders trained in a totally different way – not only Bible exegesis, but human relations and entrepreneurial leadership. It will need christians willing to take hold of Jesus’ mission to “make disciples of all nations” rather than sit comfortably fed in safe pews.

It will be hardest of all for clergy and Bible colleges, who need to adapt to a totally new way of doing things. But if we are going to reverse the decline, these difficulties need to be faced.

Quick book review

Not everyone needs to read this book. But church leaders certainly do. And anyone who wants to see the christian faith grow and flourish in postmodern western secular societies.

Martin’s book takes its place alongside others which have pointed a revolutionary better way for the western church (see below for some others). He is well equipped to write this ground-breaking book:

  • He is an adult convert to christianity, so he isn’t enmeshed in unhelpful traditions.
  • He has established more than half a dozen missional communities in his local area, and most are still functioning. He’s not just a theoretician, he’s “been there and done that”.
  • He has a gift for colourful phrases that encapsulate an idea:
    • the SIC model
    • “the dead hand of apathy”
    • the ever-changing kaleidoscope of urban tribes and micro-cultures
    • the square wheel syndrome
    • Mission Pluto (to people far from the sun)
    • “their place, their time, their language, their style”

I think in his eagerness to get these ideas across, he reinforces and repeats these phrases a little too much, when I would pefer some of them to be more fully explained and more examples given. I think he would say he wants us to supply that detail, so we don’t follow him but follow the Spirit and the culture around us. But he has so much in his head, I think we’d learn from some extra detail.

He stresses culturally-sensitive evangelism but says little about how we must serve the community if we are to fulfil Jesus commands. The two go hand-in-hand I believe, and some discussion of how missional communities can serve the community would enhance the book. His approach to evangelism is traditional evangelical, whereas I think a slightly less direct approach may be better, but that doesn’t change the principles he is presenting.

Finally, I am not as confident as Martin that the missional community approach would reverse the decline in christian belief. I agree with him that deficiencies in the church are a major factor in the decline, but I think there are several other factors outside our control. (I think the church’s inability to make disciples is the main problem- but that’s another story!)

But this new take on an old approach (as old as the first century!) would surely help.

The bottom line

This book doesn’t have all the answers, but its main ideas take us an important step forward in thinking about the future. I can only hope (and pray!) that people are listening, especially clergy and denominational leaders who desperately need something completely different.

You can buy Quantum Mission at online book-sellers (prices vary a lot, so look around!), and you can visit Martin’s Unbounded Church website.

Other books worth reading

Books about church

Related Posts

Photo: Leonid meteor (“falling star”) shower by Navicore.

I’m an individual, you can’t fool me!

December 30th, 2022 in Life. Tags: , , , ,
Individual sheep

Most of us like to think we’re individuals, no-one else is quite like us, and we don’t follow the crowd.

But is that the reality? How easily are christians influenced by what others think? And would it be good if we were all individuals?

There’s safety in numbers

It’s natural for humans, and most animals, to herd together, especially when there’s danger or difficulty. It’s a survival thing. There’s safety in numbers.

For most people these days, it’s not physical survival. But most of us still tend to stick with the crowd when it comes to socialising, expressing opinions or forming beliefs.

When we are in groups, which include churches, it is likely that social influence will tend to produce conformity. We may accept without question information provided by others. Or for psychological reasons, we may not wish to speak against what seems to be the majority opinion of the group.

These processes, called “social influence” or “herd behaviour” or “group think”, have been studied by psychologists, who say that some degree of conformity is helpful for a group to make decisions and act cohesively.

But group think can also end up stifling innovation and alternative ideas, and lead to stagnation and poor decision-making.

Group think and churches

Christianity is a religion based on revelation, especially in Jesus, so it is natural that churches and christian groups will share a lot of viewpoints and attitudes. And natural that we will feel that our beliefs and our traditions are God-inspired.

But churches are also prone to group think and herd behaviour. Have you ever experienced or observed any of these behaviours?

  • Have you ever sat in a Bible study and felt unable to express your opinion because you knew the majority had already passed judgment?
  • Have you ever been in a church where it was considered ungodly to question or criticise the senior pastor?
  • Have you ever heard christians dismissing viewpoints simply because they are different? Maybe labelling them as “liberal” or “fundamentalist” or “socialist” or “heretical” without really explaining what is wrong with them?
  • Have you ever seen decisions or choices made because of people’s strong emotions and before the matter has been investigated and discussed?
  • Have you ever been in a church or group where the christian view (on politics or ethics or doctrine) was just tacitly assumed, without any thought that someone present may think differently?
  • Have you ever seen good ideas just ignored without being properly considered?

All of these behaviours are signs that good discussion and decision processes may have given way to group think.

Churches and new ideas

If herd behaviour is prevalent, the church loses out.

  • Many people feel discouraged, left out or not listened to.
  • Many gifts are under recognised and under-used.
  • Things keep going in the same old way, and new ideas and understandings rarely see the light of day.
  • The church can easily lose touch with the community around them and its values and culture, and so finds it difficult to mission to that community.

Ideas whose time has come?

The last 50 years have seen enormous change in social values and in christian beliefs. For example:

  • Questioning of literalist ways of interpreting the Bible, in favour of the way Jesus and his apostles used their scriptures.
  • Disbelief that God would order genocide in the Old Testament or send people to an everlasting hell.
  • Recognition that Jesus’ main message was the kingdom of God, and how we might think about that today.
  • Greater acceptance of the worth of academic study of Biblical history and archaeology.
  • Recognition of the evil of racism and the marginalisation of indigenous peoples.
  • Accepting the equality of women in society and in the church.
  • Greater acceptance of gender diversity.
  • Seeing the importance of both faith and good works (justice and mercy) in the church’s mission.
  • Increased environmental awareness and concerns.
  • Greater concern for the poor and marginalised, including refugees.
  • A breaking down of denominationalism.

We can disagree about how many of these changes have been God-inspired, but I think three things are clear:

  1. The church hasn’t always handled these issues well,
  2. Most of the changes have been opposed or resisted by many christians and many church leaders, and
  3. At least some of them have been used by the Holy Spirit to move the church forward.

Discernment

It requires discernment to make decisions about doctrinal and life issues. It’s not easy grappling with current issues and trying to see how the kingdom of God changes the way we look at them. And it can be scary reviewing traditions and teachings that no longer seem tenable. Especially when others in the church are calling us to hold the line on traditional views.

But grapple we must if we are to speak and minister to our world. The Holy Spirit has never stood still, but is always seeking to renew and reform our thinking and our ministry. As the old hymn said:

“The Lord hath yet more light and truth
  To break forth from His Word.”

Challenging the status quo

Sometimes the new light and truth will seem to contradict the old.

  • It began with Jesus challenging the received “truths” of the Pharisees and teachers of the Law.
  • The Spirit led Peter to take a different view of Gentiles than what he had been taught (Acts 10).
  • The Catholic Church branded Martin Luther a heretic because he was opposed to some established practices and teachings.
  • William Carey began the modern missionary movement, contrary to the common belief that God would convert the heathens if he wished, without missionaries.
  • Slavery in England and the US, and apartheid in South Africa, were all justifed from the Bible, and those who worked to end these evils often had to work against their fellow believers.

So if we are going to do God’s work in God’s way in the 21st century, we may have to speak against established and entrenched understandings.

Issues needing attention

There are so many issues needing attention today, I can only mention a few:

  • The growing irrelevance of many churches to the cultures around them.
  • The professionalising of the ministry so that pastors burn out while lay people are demotivated and passive.
  • A more positive response to societal moves on gender inclusivity. If churches don’t believe they can endorse same sex relationships, they must develop a much more loving and accepting approach.
  • The capture of sections of the church by right-wing politics that supports conservative views on gender and abortion but otherwise is quite anti-christian, and labels as “Marxist” people who are actually trying to follow Jesus’ teachings on caring for the poor and mistreated.
  • The departure of many thoughtful young adults from the church, and in many cases from faith.
  • The challenge of modern science (evolution, climate change), medicine (gender transition, stem cell research), archaeology and Biblical scholarship (throwing doubt on significant sections of the Old Testament, and how we interpret it).
  • Postmodern disdain for doctrines like hell and exclusivity, and the practice of evangelism.

Some of these issues, I believe, require completely new understandings from the teachings of traditional christianity. Others require better approaches and explanations. But all require innovative and Spirit-guided thinking.

The church needs individuals

Most pastors and clergy are reluctant to make change. They know it will be difficult, and if they rock the boat they may lose their jobs. And besides, their training has generally been along a familiar track, and they haven’t been trained in innovation and managing change.

Many church members also prefer the status quo. It is relatively easy being a christian in most western churches, and many don’t have time, skills, or maybe interest, to innovate. They are happy to be consumers.

But there are clergy and laypeople who have spiritual depth, have the skills of an entrepreneur or a strategic planner, have the ability to think outside the square, have had experience in doing things differently, and in many cases are itching to see change. Too often they are silenced or chased away.

If churches would nurture these gifts and these “prophets”, and were willing to consider traditional doctrines and practices afresh, then change is possible.

There are known ways to avoid herd behaviour and group think, in churches and in our own lives.

Are you an individual?

Don’t let them fool you or silence your gift. Pray for God’s way to use your gift and see change happen. Avoid group think. Be sensitive to others. Be judicious in what you say when.

And if you’re not …

Try to avoid herd behaviour. Respect those who lead you and teach you, but also respect those who are contrarians. Take time to read and consider alternative opinions, don’t just reject them out of hand. Pray for the Holy Spirit to lead you into truth.

Read my summary of herd behaviour and group think in Are christians afraid of the new?

Initial graphic by Pixabay plus various clip art sheep, put together by unkleE.

The blog title (“I’m an individual, you can’t fool me!”) comes from a 1985 rap song by Jacko (Mark Jackson) an Australian footballer who was definitely an individual. So much so that, despite his footballing talent, he struggled to play in a team sport because he did his own thing. But his individuality led to him making several rap singles, making commercials for batteries and breakfast cereal, and even having a short-lived boxing career.

Related Posts

How well do you know the Christmas story?

December 18th, 2022 in Fun. Tags: , , ,
Nativity

The Christmas story is as old as time. We’ve heard it a hundred times, we’ve seen it, we’ve sung it.

But how well do we know it really? Test yourself against these twelve questions.

The questions

Test yourself with these questions, then scroll down to see how well you went.

  1. Jesus was not actually born on December 24th or December 25th. True or false?
  2. The date of Christmas was originally a pagan festival. True or false?
  3. Jesus was born in a stable because there was no room in the inn. True or false?
  4. Mary rode on a donkey on the journey to Bethlehem. True or false?
  5. Mary was heavily pregnant when she travelled and arrived just in time to give birth. True or false?
  6. The wise men in Matthew’s gospel were actually astrologers. True or false?
  7. There were three of these wise men, named Melchior, Balthazar and Jasper. True or false?
  8. Jesus was Mary & Joseph’s only child. True or false?
  9. The story of Santa Claus is based on a real person. True or false?
  10. Giving presents at Christmas is a long christian tradition based on the wise men’s gifts. True or false?
  11. Santa wears red clothes because Coca Cola gave him that colour in an advertisement. True or false?
  12. It is wrong to sully the Christmas story with politics. True or false?
Santa & sleigh

The answers according to history

I’ve taken these answers from historians and as reliable sources as I can find.

1. Jesus was not actually born on December 24th or December 25th. True or false?

This is almost certainly true. No-one knows for sure when Jesus was born, but experts say that it would have been too cold for sheep and shepherds to be outside during the night in December – they would have been indoors. The best guess is that Jesus was born in September or October, although some suggest it was Spring (March-May). The first christians weren’t apparently interested in Jesus’ birthday, and it wasn’t until the third century that anyone suggested December 25.

2. The date of Christmas was originally a pagan festival. True or false?

This is completely false. Some sceptics have said that the Roman feast of Saturnalia was celebrated on December 25 because that was the winter solstice. However Saturnalia was actually celebrated earlier in December and it wasn’t a winter solstice festival. It began as a celebration of the agricultural god Saturnus, and it became a time of feasting, drinking and games somewhat like modern Mardi Gras, and a time when established norms could be broken.

There WAS a Roman winter solstice festival, Brumalia, but it was a minor festival (ancient people apparently didn’t have much interest in the winter solstice) and it was post christian. In the 4th century, a holiday Dies Natalis Solis Invicti (meaning “Birthday of the Unconquered Sun.”) was celebrated, but it seems most likely that the date of 25 December was chosen after the Christians had begun to celebrate that date themselves.

The earliest guesses about December 25 come from theological “calculations”, based on the perception that Jesus was conceived in the same date that God created the world, March 25, and December is 9 months later.

3. Jesus was born in a stable because there was no room in the inn. True or false?

This too is false, based on a wrong translation of the story in Luke’s gospel. The word once translated as “inn” simply means “a place to stay”, and in this case probably meant a guest room.

So perhaps the story is that Joseph brought Mary to his family home in Bethlehem, where they would have been treated as honoured guests and accommodated in the family guest room. However this room would have been too small when the time came to give birth, with several women acting as midwives, so they moved out into a larger room. Such a room would have been divided into two, with humans in one half and animals in the other half on cold nights. (This practice continued into medieval times in England.)

4. Mary rode on a donkey on the journey to Bethlehem. True or false?

This is uncertain. The Bible doesn’t mention it but donkeys were a popular means of transportation so it is possible. But walking or travelling in a cart pulled by a donkey are equally possible.

5. Mary was heavily pregnant when she travelled and arrived just in time to give birth. True or false?

This is very doubtful, though it makes for stirring reading. Luke’s gospel says (2:6): “While they were there, the time came for the baby to be born”. This suggests it was some time after they arrived that Mary went into labour.

6. The wise men in Matthew’s gospel were actually astrologers. True or false?

This is likely true. The word used, “Magi”, derives from the Persian priestly caste of Zoroastrianism. These priests studied the stars, and Matthew tells that it was seeing a particular star that led them to start their journey. The term “magi” is the source of our word “magic”, and had occult connotations to Jews and Christians. In the book of Acts, the word is twice translated as “sorcerer” (Acts 8 & 13).

Many scholars believe the story of the Magi is legendary, but whether historically accurate or not, the Magi probably were astrologers, and they probably were “wise men”.

7. There were three of these wise men, named Melchior, Balthazar and Jasper. True or false?

This also isn’t stated in the Bible. All it says is that they offered three gifts (gold, frankincense and myrrh), and from this tradition has inferred that there were three of them. We have no idea about their names, or even which country they came from.

8. Jesus was Mary & Joseph’s only child. True or false?

The Bible (both Matthew’s and Luke’s gospels) say Mary was still a virgin when Jesus was conceived miraculously. Many christians believe that Mary remained a virgin, but this is a matter of faith for there isn’t any historical evidence in the records we have.

It is quite clear from the gospels that Jesus had brothers and sisters (e.g. Mark 6:3). Some christians believe these were half brothers and sisters from a previous marriage of Joseph’s, but there is no evidence for this in the gospels. What we do know is that (1) Matthew says (1:25) that Joseph “did not consummate their marriage until she gave birth to a son”, inferring that they did have sex after that, and (2) Joseph was reported to still be alive 12 years later (Luke 2:41-48) so there was plenty of time for them to have had several more children.

9. The story of Santa Claus is based on a real person. True or false?

This is probably true. Saint Nikolaos of Myra appears to have been a real bishop who lived about 270-343 CE. Many legends grew up around him after his death and historians find it difficult to separate fact from legend.

He was said to be wealthy, but determined to follow Jesus’s teachings on wealth, he resolved to give away his fortune. Among other things, he was able to save three poor sisters from prostitution by anonymously throwing three bags of gold in their window at night. You can see how the Santa story could grow from that. There were also stories of miracles he performed.

The feast day of St Nicholas was celebrated in Western Europe on December 5 or 6. In the 17th century, the English started to call him Father Christmas and moved the celebration to December 25. Meanwhile the Dutch version of Saint Nicholas became known as Sinterklaas, a corruption of Sint-Nicolaas, the name eventially becoming Santa Claus when Dutch immigrants settled in America in the 17th century. It was only in the 19th century in the US that Santa began to be depicted in a sleigh pulled by reindeer.

10. Giving presents at Christmas is a long christian tradition based on the wise men’s gifts. True or false?

While many associate Christmas gift-giving with the Magi, historians are more doubtful. It appears from historical sources that gift-giving only became part of Christmas tradition in the 16th century in Western Europe, and the gifts were fairly token. In the middle of the 19th century in the US, the idea of Santa’s elves making toys for him to put in children’s stockings was invented. Gifts have gradually become more extravgent in first world countries since then.

It turns out that most of our modern Christmas traditions come from the US in the 19th century.

11. Santa wears red clothes because Coca Cola gave him that colour in an advertisement. True or false?

This is false. The Coca Cola company depicted Santa wearing a red coat in advertisements around 1930, but he was portrayed in red as early as 1821, and this become common several decades before Cocoa Cola showed him in red.

12. It is wrong to sully the Christmas story with politics. True or false?

Clearly this isn’t a factual matter but a matter of opinion. But there are many who feelthat Christmas is one day of the year when we should forget politics and focus on the lovely story of the child born in a manger. Especially at family dinners where a variety of political views may lead to arguments.

However Christmas has always been deeply political.

  • In the Roman Empire around the time of Jesus’ birth, the Emperor was considered to be divine, the Lord, the bringer of peace. So when Luke writes of Jesus as “son of God” (1:35) who will reign over an endless kingdom (1:32-33),he was making a deeply political statement.
  • In Luke 1:53 Mary is quoted as saying “He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty.”, which sounds almost Marxist.
  • These themes of Jesus, not Caesar, as Lord (1 Corinthians 12:3), the kingdom of God (Mark 1:14-15) and God’s preference for the poor over the rich (James 5:1-6) are taken up in other places in the New Testament

So while it is best to avoid political arguments on Christmas Day (and any other day perhaps), Jesus’ coming had strong political implications which we shouldn’t shy away from.

How did you go?

Did anything surprise you? (Feel free to let me know in the comments.)

This was mostly a bit of fun. But if there is any take-home message, it is that 21st century Christmas celebrations probably owe more to legend and tradition than to fact.

The reality of Jesus is harder-edged than we often allow him to be.

I hope you have a happy and safe holiday time, whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Diwali, the winter solstice or even Saturnalia, or nothing.

Graphics: Pixabay and Pixabay.

Related Posts