
GOING DEEPER

Movember Myth #3: Mental Health is Caused by Demonic Oppression

In the meantime however, with this hope set before us, we should continue to strive against sin and its ill-effects on the world. That means seeking to provide wholistic care for those who are suffering from mental illness, and seeking it ourselves when we find ourselves in the same predicament. As a pastor, I have been approached by those who consider themselves oppressed or possessed by a demonic entity, as well as those who have struggled with serious mental health issues, even psychosis. After taking into account why someone thinks they are being demonized, I normally approach both scenarios in a very similar way. I pray for relief from demonic activity in the mighty name of Jesus (Mark 9:29), and encourage them and work with them to remove scope for the enemy to work in their life in this way (Eph 4:27). If there is no demonic activity, what have I lost? I then also encourage the person to speak to their GP (preferably a Christian one) about their concerns. If there are no medical issues, at least that has been ruled out.
If you or anyone you know is struggling with serious mental health concerns or demonic oppression, I encourage reading up with the following resources:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/christian-reflections-on-mental-disorder/
https://www.desiringgod.org/topics/spiritual-warfare
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/topics/psychology-and-disorders/
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/essay/demon-possession/
Other Resources (referred to or consulted, but not necessarily recommended):
Kemp, S., & Williams, K. (1987). Demonic possession and mental disorder in medieval and early modern Europe. Psychological Medicine, 17(1), 21-29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700012940
Pietkiewicz, I. J., Klosinska, U., & Tomalski, R. (2021). Delusions of Possession and Religious Coping in Schizophrenia: A Qualitative Study of Four Cases. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 842-853. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.628925
Read more...

Movember Myth #2: Anxiety is Just a Lack of Faith

If you think you might struggle with clinical anxiety, I encourage you to speak to your GP or a counsellor. Some resources that might be helpful as you battle with anxiety can be found below:
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/topics/fear-and-anxiety/
https://www.desiringgod.org/topics/fear-and-anxiety#
Read more...

Movember Myth #1: True Christians Don’t Struggle with Depression

https://www.desiringgod.org/topics/depression
Spiritual Depression by Martin Lloyd Jones (I have a hard copy if you’d like to borrow it)
When the Darkness will not Lift by John Piper (available for free from https://www.desiringgod.org/books/when-the-darkness-will-not-lift)
Read more...

Are all sins equally evil in God’s sight?

External action is not the be all and end all, the heart matters to God. That does not mean however that adultery and lust are equal, just that both are a violation of the 7th commandment. What most people think when they say that all sin is the same in God’s sight is that all sin separates us from God, and all sin left undealt with will lead to hell. There are not different levels of hell, reserved for the worst type of sins (at least as far as we are told in the bible). But to say that a liar has the same eternal destiny as a murderer if unrepentant is not to say that lying and murder is equal. This goes against both the teaching of the bible and our own common sense.
But this is also a biblical concept. For instance, the Old Testament law tells us “life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,” (Exo 21:23-24). The point is that you cannot take a life for someone who took a foot, the retribution needs to be fair. Likewise, in the Old Testament Law there was various levels of punishment for different sins, ranging from fines, to banishment to death. This only makes sense if God views some sins as being worse than others. But perhaps the clearest indication from the Old Testament Law that not all sins are equal is the use of the word ‘abomination’. When used, this delineates a regular sin (which separates us from God), and an extra vile sin that God abhors.
But it is also important for us not to minimalize the seriousness of our sin. When we commit large-scale, destructive sins, it may be tempting to think we are just as bad as someone who has told a lie, and thus our sin isn’t ‘too bad’. This idea might even lead people to committing worse sins, such as: “I have already committed lust, so I’m guilty anyway, I might as well have the affair now!” This is a major distortion of Jesus’s teaching! Likewise, for those who grow and change, treating all sins as equal can lead to a downplaying of God’s sanctifying work in your life.
Read more...

Where is God in the desert?

Many of you would be familiar with the famous footprints in the sand poem. For those that aren’t it is worth a read:
What is conveyed here is actually an important biblical theme that is seen particularly in light of the ‘desert’ or ‘wilderness’ theme of the Bible. As can be expected, the wilderness in the bible is not portrayed as a nice place. It is the place that the Israelites must travel through before reaching the promised land (Exo 15:22). However, the people sin and are judged with 40 more years in that wilderness (Num 14). Throughout the Pentateuch (first 5 books of the bible), the wilderness becomes a place of place of rebellion (Num 12), suffering (Exo 14:11), quarrels (Exo 17:1-2), judgement (Num 11:1-3), and temptation (Exo 17:7). The New Testament picks up this theme again in the temptation of Jesus, where he is hungry, thirsty and assailed by the devil. It is for this reason Christians often use the imagery of desert to describe times of great trial or difficulty.
Read more...

I don’t care if you liked ‘worship’ on Sunday!

Perhaps my most provocative title, but don’t worry, it was more than just trying to grab your attention. It also isn’t a slight against our fantastic music team and all the effort they put in (except for maybe the lousy drummer). Rather it is a blanket statement that should be able to apply to any week at our church, as ultimately, our music is not there to please you, but to please God.
“Why do we worship? – is it for God or for man? The unspoken but increasingly common assumption of today’s Christendom is that worship is primarily for us – to meet our needs… The telltale sign of this kind of thinking is the common post-worship question, “what did you think of the service today?” the real question ought to be, “What did God think of it and those who worshipped?”” – R Kent Hughes, Disciplines of a Godly man – pg 138-139
I would add to Hughes’s tell-tale sign my own question: “what did I get out of worship today?” rather than the more important “what did I give to God in worship today?”. I think we often make music into the attraction or entertainment element of our church services, the thing that might differentiate between us and another church. This is not just a problem for younger Christians who like the latest worship hit out of the Pentecostal megachurches. Even hymns can be used to this effect as they are often chosen to be the familiar one for the ‘oldies’ or simply to “keep the old-timers happy”. This is a man-centred approach to worship rather than a God-centred one.
So what is the solution? Well I think we need to re-frame how we talk about worship. On Sunday, Simon from Compassion said, to enthusiastic applause, that we don’t treat our music like a performance. But here’s the thing, I think we should. Except it isn’t the band performing and the church the audience. The church is performing and God is the audience! We should be asking what God wants to hear, and the type of music he likes. Unfortunately, the bible is scant on scores and musical compositions. However, it is big on lyrics! We do need to make sure the things we sing to God and about Him line up with worship in the bible. But perhaps even more important than the lyrics, is the heart.
Jesus, when addressing a controversy over worship had some powerful words to say. I’m going to re-write and paraphrase this (a dangerous thing to do to the bible), but I think the parallels are there: “Our ancestors worshipped with hymns, but you young‘uns claim that we must worship with loud pop music” “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, it’s not about whether you worship in hymn or in Hillsong… Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks.” (taken loosely from 4:20-23 with 4:23 unchanged). The remarkable thing about this passage is that it is the only time in scripture that I am aware of God actively seeking something from believers. It is remarkable that we may actually (as C.S. Lewis writes) “be a real ingredient in the divine happiness”. Therefore, it is not the polished-ness of a performance that impresses God. It is the love of each and every Christian and adoration for Him that he cares about. It’s a bit like receiving a card from my 4-year-old telling me that I’m the best daddy in the world and how much he loves me… and me pulling him up on the spelling. God just isn’t that interested in how we sound, or even what style we use, as long as those things stem from a love for him and a love for others.
We gather on Sunday’s to sing to God. If you have to do it in a way that isn’t really your cup of tea, I think that would be an even greater gift to our God who sees the obstacle you face, and the sacrifice you make in order to praise him. Soli Deo gloria!
Read more...

Did Jesus Even Exist?



wise King? It was just after that their Kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise King die for good; He lived on in the teaching which He had given.” Not exactly a belief in the resurrection, but there is little doubt, even from secular historians, that the wise king referred to here is none other than Jesus Christ. Other secular sources that I don’t have time to go through now but I encourage you to look up if interested are Pliny The Younger, Lucian, Phelgon, Celus, Suetonius, and Thallus. I quoted at the beginning a quote from N.T. Wright that it would be easier to deny the existence of Tiberius Caesar than Jesus Christ. A bold claim, but this is why he can make it. Jesus’s existence is supported by 9 secular sources, 20 Christian non-biblical sources and all 27 New Testament texts. Compare this to the measly 10 historical references we have to the emperor that was in power at the same time. Furthermore, the quality and quantity of the historical documents supporting Jesus far outstrips roman leaders of the time. Take Julius Caesar, the most famous and unarguably historic of the Roman emperors. Historic information about his life is contained mainly in four different sources. These sources have between them around 53 manuscripts to work out what was actually written. The earliest of these dates to a good 500 years after Julius Caesar supposedly lived, with the majority being over 1000 years after the fact. Compare this to Jesus, with his 56 different sources, 5800 different manuscript, dating from as early as a few decades after they were written. To deny Jesus’ existence altogether is completely unfeasible from an historical perspective.

The Problem of bias
Read more...

Blessed shall he be who takes your little ones and dashes them against the rock!

Read more...

Why read or preach on the Old Testament?

As we embarked on our new series through Nehemiah this week, I had interesting conversation with visitors to our church. They pointed out that their old church never preached on the Old Testament, and it was refreshing to see that ours did. Many have commented both positively and negatively on how much Old Testament we use in our sermons. For those who are unaware, we do four main series throughout a year (based roughly on the school terms), and we spend half of them going through an Old Testament book. Sometimes, this may feel dry, sometimes even reading the Old Testament can be a challenge. So I thought in this post I would provide some key reasons why we as a church preach from the Old Testament, and why it would be good for you to include it in your personal bible reading.
Read more...

Should all Christians speak in tongues?

I recently preached on Acts 2 in church (listen here). Knowing the controversial nature of the passage, I expected to be harangued as I left church. Surprisingly, I only got positive feedback from both charismatic and conservative minded people alike. However, I am aware that not all in the wider Christian community would be so appreciative. Particularly controversial I’m sure is my assertion that tongues is not the only and definitive evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit. I thought I would post this article explaining why I believe that is the case, to give some support for what I said in church. Afterwards, I quickly cover why I think that regardless of our difference on that one issue, why the Charismatic revival has been a blessing on the Lord’s church. So, these are 12 reasons why I don’t think tongues is the evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit.
- The emphasis of Acts 2 is on the message not the method. They do indeed speak in tongues, but Luke draws attention that it was to “declare the wonders of God” (Acts 2:11). This is clearly in line with the emphasis in the first chapter as to why the needed the Spirit, to be empowered to witness (1:8). Drawing attention away from the message to focus on the tongues goes against the essential meaning of the passage.
- The reception of the Holy Spirit is tied to salvation. We see that in Romans 8:9 that “if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ.” The New Testament is also clear on what brings salvation: Faith alone. To insist on another step, such as speaking in tongues, is to go to dangerous territory.
- Only 3 conversion stories in Acts explicitly include the note of speaking in tongues (2:2-4, 10:44-46 and 19:6). The salvation of the Samaritans in chapter 8 doesn’t explicitly include it, but safe to say it probably happened there too. There are at least 9 occasions of conversion where it isn’t included (8:36; 9:17–19; 13:12, 48; 14:1; 16:14; 17:4, 34). Saying it did because all Christians speak in tongues is circular reasoning. I’m not saying it didn’t happen in any of these cases, at least one went on to speak in tongues (Paul), but we no nothing of the others. 4 of the 13 conversion stories in Acts is simply not enough to determine a precedent.
- The specific circumstance of those 4 stories have alternative reasons why the speaking of tongues makes sense. They all are the first time a people group have received the Spirit, and thus are evidence that they have received the Spirit in the same way as the first Christians. The point is that Jew, Samaritan, gentile and converts of John are all accepted by God and should thus be accepted by the church.
- Paul writes the only connection between the term “all” and “speaking in tongues”, and his point is that not all speak in tongues (1 Cor 12:31). It takes a certain amount of mental gymnastics to explain around that.
- Later in 1 Corinthians 14, when Paul says he wishes his readers could all speak in tongues (14:5), it suggests that they can’t. He doesn’t rebuke them for that and suggest they need to work on it, rather he directs their focus elsewhere.
- When Paul tells us to desire the greater gifts in 1 Corinthians 12:31, he has just finished listing gifts, starting with “first…, second…, third…, and then…” This suggests and order of pre-eminence or importance. He puts tongues at the end of the list. When Paul says desire the greater gifts, he is clearly trying to draw their attention away from tongues to more useful gifts for the life of the church. If Paul doesn’t consider tongues a ‘greater’ gift, it hardly can be considered the foundational, evidential gift many assume.
- When we are told to judge as to someone’s faith and hence salvation, the focus is not on gifts but on fruit. Hence the way to tell if someone has the spirit is not whether they have any particular gift, but whether they manifest love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. (Gal 5:22-23)
- It is important not to jump to the conclusion that narrative portions of scripture are prescriptive and not just descriptive. Unless we have solid reasons for believing otherwise, narrative in the bible is telling us what happened, not telling us what we should do. Otherwise, we could look at the book of Joshua and justify genocide, or at Isaiah 20 and justify public nudity.
- If Acts 2 is taken as prescriptive, (i.e. what must always happen in the life of the church), we should also expect wind and fire and our language to be a known, understandable human language. That is not to deny there might be other form of tongues, but to say those other forms of tongues are the evidence of the Holy Spirit is not ignore the example in Acts 2. One could argue that only known languages are the evidence of the Holy Spirit, and this would line up more closely with what happens in the four tongue events of Acts. However, the sceptic in me thinks this can’t be the measurement because it is harder to fake.
- It is not taught anywhere in the New Testament. If indeed tongues is the evidence of the Holy Spirit, you would expect that to be clearly taught in any of the epistles, or even foreshadowed in the gospels.
- It has not been the history of the church. It’s dangerous to base arguments purely on tradition or church history, however when you are saying that tongues are for all Christians, you would expect the Holy Spirit to maintain that witness across history
- The power of Worship. Until the Charismatic renewal, worship tended to be a reserved, reverent affair. While trying not to lose the reverence, Charismatics have brought a much need vigour and excitement to our music in particular. David sung with instruments and percussion, and even danced before the Lord. With our deeper understanding of God’s love for us in Christ, we surely should not be less enthusiastic.
- The power of the Holy Spirit. It is a life changing power. In Acts we witness lives being turned upside down, and we read of the power, and the boldness that accompanies those who received the Spirit. Many evangelicals think the Holy Spirit is merely a doctrine and forget that He brings power!
- The power of experience. Christianity is not simply about agreeing to a set of propositions, it is about experiencing the risen Christ. The Holy Spirit didn’t subtly sneak in to the first Christians, He filled them!
- The power of community. My personal (and indeed subjective experience) is that Pentecostal churches tend to be places where the marginalised, the single mums, the low socio-economic and the outsiders feel welcome. It was in a Pentecostal church I gave my life back to God and the biggest reason was because it was there where I first felt like I had a church family.
Read more...