Anonymous asks: Have you read “The Evangelical Universalist” or “The Inescapable Love of God”? If so, what do you make of Evangelical Universalism?
No I haven’t, but I have downloaded the first of these and will post a review when I am done.
Anonymous asks: Have you read “The Evangelical Universalist” or “The Inescapable Love of God”? If so, what do you make of Evangelical Universalism?
No I haven’t, but I have downloaded the first of these and will post a review when I am done.
" I know of no little girl, and neither do you, who says "I wanna be a prostitute when I grow up." They do it 'cause they're forced to out of economic circumstances. And dire economic need is a form of coercion." Amy Gardner, The West Wing, Season 3 - The Women of Qumar
I’ve been doing some research and meeting some very interesting and thoughtful people who are engaging with the issue of prostitution and sex trafficking. I come from a socially conservative Christian perspective and the position on prostitution is quite uniformly held. As I engage with those who approach the world from a progressive point of view and even from a feminist point of view I find vastly different conclusions on the approach to prostitution.
Some wish to promote prostitution as an ordinary occupation that represents a women’s right to choose to use her body as she sees fit – if she wishes to be entrepreneurial with her sexuality then so be it. The response is to legalise and regulate. Others see prostitution as inherently abusive, an act of male violence, where involvement in the industry is not a matter of free choice but involves to at least some degree a situation of compulsion and coercion. The response is to criminalise that violent act and so prosecute the purchasers of sexual services, not the prostitutes themselves – the so-called “Swedish Model.”
I sympathise with the latter view of course. It’s a view that considers the sex industry to be inherently dangerous for all concerned and looks for an approach that has, at the very least, the broad aim of reducing the size (eliminating even) prostitution altogether. I have drawn analogies to the tobacco industry – recognised as inherently dangerous.
Others have gone a step further however and have drawn analogies between the sex industry and the slave industry. The newly released film Nefarious: Merchant of Souls takes this approach from a Christian point of view. From the other direction there are a number of organisations, particularly in Europe, that are using the language of abolition, with an unashamed correlation to the abolition of slavery movement of Wilberforce’s day, as the approach that should be taken.
The following are a list of resources that I will continue to update as I come across them that takes this line and promote the abolition of prostitution.
Anonymous asks:
Do you agree with the image at the link below regarding after death happenings? http://www.bible.ca/hades-lk-16.gif
[Image reproduced here]
Thanks for the question. The answer is “mostly.” It is a diagram that refers to the “intermediate state” – that state of existence between a person’s physical death and the return of Christ and the final judgement. I’ve answered a question on this topic previously.
The diagram draws heavily on the Luke 16 parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus which portrays an existence in which there is a “great gulf” between the (righteous) Lazarus and Abraham and the (unrighteous) Rich Man. I assume the word “paradise” is taken from Christ’s proclamation on the cross to the one crucified next to him. ”Tartarus” is a word from Greek Legend to do with the lowest reaches of the heavens and earth; it is not a biblical word and it is careless to use it.
Within the domain of “all humans” (circle on the left) you have a division between the “Power of Darkness” and the “Kingdom of Christ.” There is tartaric doom for those who are in the power of darkness and the “unfaithful” in the kingdom of Christ. I’m not sure what the originator is getting at here but this framework doesn’t sit well with me. The simple demarcator is Christ as Messiah and those that are “in Christ” by covenant of grace through faith and those who are not. I’m not too unhappy with “infants” being classified as those childlike innocents to which the Kingdom of God belongs but in my mind individualistic soteriological analysis such as this is unhelpful. The people of God are in Christ in paradise when they die, that is all that needs be said.
I have no problem with a general resurrection occurring before a final judgement at the end. I do have a difficulty with what follows that event. ”Heaven” is a nebulous term. The way we use the word (as in “go to heaven when we die”) is actually more of a referent to the sense of paradise in the intermediate state. The resurrection glory that follows the general resurrection is not so much heavenly but immortal, glorified, new heavens and new earth including some sense of imperishable physicality. Consider 1 Cor 15.
And I am of the opinion that the Lake of Fire for those who are not in Christ is not a gateway to eternal torment but the means of the true eternal punishment – eradication of existence itself. In this sense, unless I can be convinced otherwise, I am something of an annihilationist.
Hope that helps.
Professor Stuart Green interacting with the AFACT-iiNet case here in Australia. As reported by ABC he puts forward a view of copyright violation as “tresspass more than theft.”
It’s a worthy metaphor that comes closer to the reality of “ownership” with reference to information compared to other assertion of property rights.
On this day, thirty years ago, as a six year old, I arrived on these shores with my family. We had emigrated to Australia from England.
We landed in Sydney. I remember gum trees (of course). I remember large cars with funny plastic “wind deflectors” on the drivers side. I remember banana trees and my “thongs” (no longer “flip-flops”) heated to melting point by the asphalt of the carpark getting stuck to the frame of the shopping trolley when I stood on it for a ride.
My parents had arrived to leave the rat-race and to shape their contribution to society around a deliberate embracing of peasantry. They implemented this, eventually, on a dairy farm in Tasmania. And the rest is history.
And I have not yet left these shores. Here I remain, a 36-year-old 30-year-old Australian, and I count my blessings.
<Cue the required sociological analysis…>
I love Australia. I love the maverick classlessness. Those cutesy ads about having beetroot in our burgers and riding in the front seat of the taxi work for a reason! I even love our naivete – the way we cringe at Australian movies while aspiring to hold our own in the gangsta-rapping American kitsch of the new millennium. I am not ashamed that I get the warm fuzzies when I remember that Simon Baker (aka The Mentalist), like Ricky Ponting, was born in Launceston – the nearest city to where I grew up.
What some have taken as a cultural sell-out (not without justification but still…) actually speaks to something positive – our malleability. We are not locked in stone, bound by cultural accretions and an oversupply of anachronisms and overworn idealisms. We can still be shaped. Which means that while we may currently have the overly Boomerish shape of the 1980′s West, the mercantilist shape of 1990′s America, and are developing the intolerant PC tolerance shape of 2000′s Britain, we need not. We can still do our own thing. We are big enough to make it work. We are small enough that we can fly under the radar, or wherever we want for that matter.
In recent weeks I have been struck by the utter goodness that God calls us to. It was an uncompromising goodness that took Christ to the cross. Following him, that goodness can still get traction here in Australia. Terra Australia el Spiritu Sancto for the win people.
My awesome wife has started blogging.
The world will be blessed by her wisdom and passion.
See here: http://briggs.id.au/rain/
CraigC. asks:
Does God want the Gospel spread by deceit? Is it is moral to collect donations on the basis of deceit? He has not promoted the Gospel but shamed it. God did not speak to Camping in any way but by Satan and his own imagination and deceit and greed. He does nothing to promote Christianity in any way, but in fact HARMs it. Maybe God should harm him (Deut 18).
Thanks for the question. I assume you’re referencing some of what I’ve had to say about doomsdayer Harold Camping.
I’m not sure where you’re coming from, but to answer your questions
No, God does not want the Gospel spread by deceit. However, there are many times when God has used the deceitful ways of men to his purposes. This is the simple demonstration that God’s will will be done and nothing, not even deceit, will prevent it.
No, it is not moral to collect donations on the basis of deceit. There are many so-called Christian organisations that are guilty of this. I watched a documentary the other day which attended the seminar of someone who promised corporate success through hypnotism. This man was at least upfront, but he looked and sounded, and used the same pyschological trickery as many prosperity breathing so-called evangelists who collect donations by this form of deceit. Camping is not alone in this regard.
Yes, I agree that Camping is not a true prophet and in many ways has harmed the cause of the gospel. Yet God is gracious, and even through this circumstance he will achieve his purpose.
God’s judgment on Camping is God’s. It is not my place to tell Him what to do.


When a new fad of fiction hits the popular mind I make a habit of engaging with it. Twelve years ago I did it when Harry Potter arced up. More recently I engaged with Twilight (where by “engage” I mean forcing myself to complete the first book). After all, its from this sort of phenomenon that common metaphors and other tools of communication evolve, and they are useful.
And so I read The Hunger Games trilogy by Suzanne Collins. And I thoroughly enjoyed it. In and of itself its a decent story. But the cultural influences are so clearly obvious that there is is an inevitable undertone of (unwitting?) social commentary. How can there not be when you have a narrative in which there are clear allusions to Twilight, Survivor, Extreme Makeover with a nuance of Man vs Wild, The Empire Strikes Back and even a taste Dickensian rags and riches?
Without wanting to give the story away, it revolves around the main character, Katniss Everdeen, a prodigious illegal hunter from the poverty-ridden District 12. She finds herself, together with teenagers from other Districts caught up in The Hunger Games themselves – a televised fight-to-the-death for the population of the oppressive Capitol where there can be only one Victor. To this experience is added social rebellion, military rebellion, and ultimately cynical disillusion. All this is coloured by a love triangle (of course), family loyalties, mental illness, grief, and determination. I was genuinely entertained.
The depth, however, lies in some of the underlying themes. One of these is clearly the fakery of television. Much is made of the young girl from nowhere being dressed up to play her part for the entertainment driven Capitol. But as the story progresses this play-acting becomes a weapon. The superhero-alter ego construct is clear, but Katniss’ hero side, the Mockingjay, is a phantom of media manipulation. The Mockingjay has no powers but what the cameras and an editing suite can give her. I appreciate the deconstruction of modern media – perhaps if nothing else these books might teach a generation to be sceptical about Today Tonight and its kin.
I found the first-person present writing voice to be disconcerting and at times unhelpful. The one benefit such a style has, however, is to allow the inner thought-life of the character to come to the fore. Katniss is constantly battling herself – her mixed motivations, her self-aware selfishness, her weariness and worries. I’ve read some reviews that deride these books as playing Katniss as the fickle female, unsure of herself, unable to lead, having all the exciting bits happen while she is unconscious. I simply think its a description of reality of what goes inside the head of all those who dare to have that head above the trenches, taking a chance, pushing at risks. If these books demonstrate that heroism is not about being unmoved but about choosing to choose well within the darkness and confusion, they will have done well.
Finally there is a social commentary, on Western Society and humankind as a whole. The third book has Katniss in conversation talking with a defector from the Capitol, Plutarch, who intones the phrase Panem et Circenses. Panem is the name given to the world in which these stories take place, here the underlying allusion is collapsed.
“What’s that?” I recognize Panem, of course, but the rest is nonsense.
“It’s a saying from thousands of years ago, written in a language called Latin about a placed called Rome,” he explains. “Panem et Circenses translates into ‘Bread and Circuses’. The writer was saying that in return for full bellies and entertainment, his people had given up their political responsibilities and therefore for their power.”
The latin phrase is applied to the Capitol which correlates to America and the West. I am amongst those who draw parallels between the Roman and American empires, the stupefication of a populace, the embrace of debauchery and libertinism that eventually leads to collapse from within. We should learn from history.
Collins uses her books to explore some hypotheticals. She ends up with no solutions. There is no chance of reformation, the human self-destruction will continue. For Collins the only hope lies in escape, laying low, self-sufficient and separate. Ultimately this is no solution at all, but then the readers of these books will need to figure that out for themselves.
These books will be no Harry Potter. People will not “grow up” with the characters as they grew up with Harry and Hermione and Ron. But its a worthwhile flash in the cultural pan and worth a read if you’re up for some light entertainment. The movie will probably ruin it though, but that goes without saying.
This is one of those “an oldy but a goody” books. It’s by Michael Green and was first published in 1987.
I had a reason for reading it. It was one of those awesome moments of messy missiology when gospel realities and ecclesiastical niceties don’t quite line up: My Bishop was leading a reaffirmation of baptism service for two refugees from a local immigration detention centre. And I was tasked with considering the liturgy, talking with the two men, unpacking what they meant by the ceremony, what we meant, what was meant to be meant etc. etc.
It reminded me of a number of occasions doing ministry at Somerset where people would join the church. Some were baptised as infants, some as adults, some as both, some not at all. How do we bring cohesion and coherency to all this without losing hold on the real meaning of baptism, its significance and value, and ultimately its contribution to the worship of our lives?
This book by Michael Green helps us wade through this sort of quagmire.
While Green clearly holds a paedobaptist (infant baptism) position, the framework of the book interacts with three streams of churchmanship – the Catholic, the Protestant and the Charismatic.
The bulk of the book interacts between the Protestant and Catholic which, if you know the history of the debate, is understandable. I want recap it here, but the particularly insightful contributions that I came across included the best exposition yet of a correlation between circumcision and baptism as a covenantal sign (p25) and chapters five and six which give an excellent defense and apology for the validity and value of infant baptism.
Green does not ignore the need for constant reform, however. Errors have been made on every side. This is where the practical usefulness of the book is apparent. We are given some key guiding principles (e.g. no liturgy can create reality p95, baptism is a witness to grace, not faith p114). We are also given some help in applying these principles in the messy world of reality. The consideration of baptism reaffirmation spoke to my immediate need.
This is a short, sharp book which gives a thorough overview with the occasional gem that explores some depths. An excellent introduction to the subject and absolute must for those who truly want to genuinely wish to engage and understand his side of this particular debate.