Catholic Coup for Hillsong

An interesting article appeared in the SMH today describing how the young woman who played the role of Mary on Catholic World Youth Day has joined Hillsong Church.

Things I found notable were the appeal of Hillsong to her, and the acceptance of her change by members of the Catholic faith, who despite her leaving, did not write her off as no longer Christian for leaving Catholicism.

In the article, Ms Dickson is quoted as saying that she finds a greater hunger for God satisfied at Hillsong, where her faith is about a lifestyle, rather than just attending church on a Sunday. Giving comments on her decision, both Catholic Archbishop George Pell, and her friend who played Judas, comment that she is not leaving Jesus Christ – Hillsong still believes in Jesus and his teachings.

I speculate that Hillsong has probably been very welcoming to Ms Dickson, and that the initial experience there has been wonderful and exciting for her. I guess I relate it to my own first couple of years in a megachurch – the worship alone was better than anything I’d experienced previously, and it was a pretty heady experience. In particular the belief that God would be such a tangible part of daily life – and was interested in your real day to day issues – and that you could expect to really see Him move and make a difference – was new to me at that time.

Is this the experience of most people when they join a megachurch, and when does it start to change? There was an innocence to my experience of it all initially, when I look back, which seems to have been lost over time. There are some key concepts in there which I still think are valuable – the way that we can relate to God so daily and so intimately and tangibly, is one of the good things that I believe the Pente churches have re-emphasised. (Regardless of other developments.)

Another question this story raises with me is, how similar is Hillsong now to the Catholic faith in part? Perhaps that has also helped the transition in this case – but then maybe it is the same regardless of what church people have initially come from.

The acceptance of Hillsong’s faith in Christ by members of the Catholic church, including it would seem (at some level at least) by Archbishop George Pell, is also interesting. Hillsong did support Catholic World Youth Day, when some other local evangelical churches would have nothing to do with it, denouncing Catholics as not Christian at all. Hillsong appears to be inclusive, regarding Catholics as part of the body of Christ, even though they’d disagree on many issues. CCC had varied responses at different churches – some supported it (my local one did), and some were against it. The Sydney Anglicans of course, had their own event in direct competition. Perhaps Hillsong is reaping some reward for its more inclusive approach.

*****************************
RavingPente

Coming Out – an analysis of the Emerging Church

Scott McKnight, in his article in Christianity Today, Five Streams of the Emerging Church, examines some of the ideology of the movement.

According to Knight, critics analyse, perhaps harshly, the Emerging Church thus:

It is said that emerging Christians confess their faith like mainliners—meaning they say things publicly they don’t really believe. They drink like Southern Baptists—meaning, to adapt some words from Mark Twain, they are teetotalers when it is judicious. They talk like Catholics—meaning they cuss and use naughty words. They evangelize and theologize like the Reformed—meaning they rarely evangelize, yet theologize all the time. They worship like charismatics—meaning with their whole bodies, some parts tattooed. They vote like Episcopalians—meaning they eat, drink, and sleep on their left side. And, they deny the truth—meaning they’ve got a latte-soaked copy of Derrida in their smoke- and beer-stained backpacks.

To counter this, McKnight refers to Eddie Gibbs and Ray Bolger’s Book, Emerging Churches: Creating Christian Community in Postmodern Cultures, who say:

Emerging churches are communities that practice the way of Jesus within postmodern cultures. This definition encompasses nine practices. Emerging churches (1) identify with the life of Jesus, (2) transform the secular realm, and (3) live highly communal lives. Because of these three activities, they (4) welcome the stranger, (5) serve with generosity, (6) participate as producers, (7) create as created beings, (8) lead as a body, and (9) take part in spiritual activities.

McKnight breaks down the Emerging Church into five basic streams;

The Prophetic, in which he suggests they are ‘consciously and deliberately provocative’, believing, amongst other things, that the Church must change, and beginning to ‘live as if that change had occurred’;

Postmodern, which considers the ‘collapse of inherited metanarratives (overarching explanations of life)’, rather than ‘the denial of truth’, the challenge of being able to rightly divide and understand, let alone live the truth;

Praxis-oriented, determining ‘how the faith is lived out, being an attempt to fashion a new ecclesiology, including creative, experiential and sensory worship’, the idea that ‘how a person lives is more important than what he or she believes’, and ‘mission through participation’;  

Post-evangelical, being ‘a protest against much of evangelicalism that is now practised’, and allowing ’suspicion of systematic theology, partly because the diversity of theologies alarms us, and partly because no language is capable of capturing the Absolute Truth who alone is God’;

Political, as someone says: ‘a latte-drinking, backpack-lugging, Birkenstock-wearing group of 21st-century, left-wing, hippie wannabes. Put directly, they are Democrats. And that spells “post” for conservative-evangelical-politics-as-usual.’

McKnight embraces the symbolism of the Emerging Church, but from a standpoint of remaining an evangelist. It’s worth reading through his analysis, to see if you think there is a shift of thinking affecting adherents of the mainline churches and even contemporary churches, through being influenced by emerging church cultures, which may explain some of the disenchantment of some towards traditional hierarchal structures, and whether this is a good development generally.

Poet Laureate pushes for Bible Study in schools

More from the Mail while we’re on the subject of the Bible, this time the encouraging opinion of the British Poet Laureate, who would like to see the Bible read in schools for its great literary and historical content. The Mail reports:

Children are being robbed of their heritage because schools are failing to cover classic Bible and history stories, the Poet Laureate warned yesterday.

Andrew Motion called for all children to study the Bible at school for its ‘great’ educational stories such as the temptation of Adam and Eve, the siege of Jericho and battle between David and Goliath.

He warned that traditional stories were in danger of disappearing from public knowledge because they are no longer being properly imparted to children at school.

Too many students arriving at university to study literature or history have merely a ’sketchy’ knowledge of Bible stories, history stories and Greek and Roman myths, and would struggle on their courses as a result, he said.

Mr Motion, professor of creative writing at London University’s Royal Holloway College, said the Bible should be covered at school ’simply because it is full of terrific stories’ .

He said himself ‘I am not a believer’, but added: ‘These stories are primitive. They speak to us about human nature and the recurring patterns of human behaviour,’ he said.

He said he was not arguing for religious indoctrination, adding: ‘I am not for a moment suggesting that everybody be made to go to church during their childhood.

‘But what I do think would be worth thinking about is how there could be some kind of general treatment of this all the way through a child’s schooling.

‘I do think there is a real problem with the education system that has allowed these great stories to disappear, to fade out of the diet everyone gets at school.

‘It’s an essential piece of cultural luggage.’

He suggested classical myths and history stories, such as the story of Diana and Actaeon or the English civil war, should be part of a general studies programme in schools.

He warned that ‘quite soon very large parts of what should be common knowledge will be disappearing’.

He added: ‘There is nothing elitist about this. I just find it really depressing that large parts of our heritage are going to become the preserve of only the academies and only parts of the academies.

‘It seems a great denial of the opportunities open to us as human beings.’

He said it should not be a ‘bolt-on’ in an increasingly crowded curriculum but ‘part of a broader rethinking about what education is meant to be’.

Ofsted has warned that history is becoming ‘marginalised’ with only around a third of youngsters studying the subject after the age of 14.

At university, humanities undergraduates could be given crash courses in the great stories, Mr Motion said.

‘I would start with Christian stories, Qur’anic stories, Greek and Roman stories, but it could be refined depending on what the subject is.’

He added: ‘If people say this is about ramming religion down people’s throats, they aren’t thinking about it hard enough.

‘It’s more about the power of these words to connect with deep, recurring human truths and also the story of the influence of that language and those stories.’

Ofsted has warned that history is becoming ‘marginalised’ with only around a third of youngsters studying the subject after the age of 14.

Keith Porteous Wood, executive director of the National Secular Society, said: ‘It’s a bit excessive – children already get 45 minutes of religious education a week for 10 years.

‘They also attend compulsory acts of worship which includes reading the Bible. Isn’t that enough?’

The Bible is indeed regarded as one of the great literary pieces. It has been studied and discussed for centuries. It is intrinsically a part of western civilisation and culture. It helped define the English language, and other languages commonly used today. It issues some of the finest values and advice available. All this and much more without even touching on salvation, grace, God’s purposes for mankind, and many other valuable assets found in its pages.

Yes please, and put it firmly into Australian school curriculum while you’re at it!

Top Shelf Political Correctness

British Libraries have been told to put Bibles on the top shelf to prevent upsetting Muslims. I mean we don’t want to cause offence to anyone do we? The Daily Mail reports:

Librarians are being told to move the Bible to the top shelf to avoid giving offence to followers of Islam. 

Muslims have complained of finding the Koran on lower shelves, saying it should be put above commonplace things. 

So officials have responded with guidance, backed by ministers, that all holy books should be treated equally and go on the top shelf together. 

The Bible, left, has been moved to the top shelf in libraries following requests that the Koran, right, be put above ordinary books

This means that Christian works, which also have immense historical and literary value, will be kept out of the reach and sight of many readers. 

The guidance was published by the Museums, Libraries and Archives Council, a quango answering to Culture Secretary Andy Burnham. 

 

It said Muslims in Leicester had moved copies of the Koran to the top shelves of libraries, in keeping with the belief that the Koran is the all-important word of God. 

The report said the city’s librarians consulted the Federation of Muslim Organisations and were advised that all religious texts should be kept on the top shelf. 

‘This meant that no offence is caused, as the scriptures of all the major faiths are given respect in this way, but none is higher than any other,’ the guidance added. 

Critics said such a move implied religious works should be treated as objects of veneration rather than as books to be read. Robert Whelan of the Civitas think-tank said: 

The shelving guidance came from a quango answering to Andy Burnham

‘Libraries and museums are not places of worship. They should not be run in accordance with particular religious beliefs. 

‘This is violating the principles of librarianship and it is part of an insidious trend.’ 

He said the principle that books should be available to everyone was established in Europe in the Middle Ages. 

‘One of the central planks of the Protestant Reformation was that everybody should have access to the Bible,’ he added. 

Simon Calvert of the Christian Institute said: ‘It is disappointing if the policy of libraries is dictated by the practices of one group. 

‘It is particularly disappointing if this is done to put the scriptures beyond reach. 

‘I hope there will be a rethink. I understand that Muslims revere their own text, but in public libraries there should not be a policy of putting religious texts out of reach.’ 

Inayat Bunglawala, of the Engage think tank, which encourages Muslims to play a greater role in public life, said: ‘If Muslims wish to see the Koran placed on a higher shelf, and library rules say it should be there, then that is a welcome and considerate gesture. 

‘But one size does not fit all. If Christians do not want to see the Bible treated in the same way, I do not see why it has to be dealt with the same.’ 

Canon Chris Sugden, of the Anglican Mainstream movement, said: ‘This does appear to be a reversion to medieval times, when the Bible could be read only by priests in Latin and was not to be defiled by ordinary people reading it. 

‘The principle to be challenged is that there is a certain way in which one must treat all holy books. 

‘The Bible is readily available, and it would not be difficult to have more than one copy, with some on display within the reach of children.’ 

The guidelines warned against another decision made in Leicester, in which Islamic material had been bought from local suppliers. 

Libraries then found they had put into stock Islamic books that were condoning violence against non- Muslims, the report said. 

The new guidelines make it clear that pornography can be offered by libraries. 

They said that some have stocked the Black Lace series of erotic stories aimed at women, and that others bought and lent Madonna’s Sex. 

Librarians faced a ‘difficult balance’ but should try to ‘reflect changing fashion and opinion’, the guidance said. 

Culture Minister Barbara Follett said: ‘We have to give staff the tools to enable them to make decisions about what materials they can and should stock while, at the same time, promoting learning, education and cultural inspiration for all.

Didn’t Jesus tell us that the Gospel of the Kingdom would offend some people? Is there a problem with causing offence over belief systems, provided it leads to healthy discussion rather than violent militant reprisals? Or, to put it another way, how is it possible not to offend others from a different persuasion unless we all completely shut up about what we believe, including Muslims, who seem to complain about being upset an awful lot!

(via Andrew Bolt)

Senator Grassley a tither

It’s all quiet down at Senator Grassley’s place, maybe because the election fever in the US has subsided for a couple of years, and he’s back on the road, touring his Iowa constituency.

Interestingly there hasn’t been much to report recently about the six ministries Grassley asked to provide details of accounts, including those which did not comply.

I checked his site for information, but nothing much since 2007 on this issue.

However the good Senator made this interesting statement, on which he based his challenge to the six ministries involved:

As a Christian myself, and a person who believes in tithing, I feel I have a right to know where my money goes. If a person gets a tax deduction for a donation, the deduction and donation should be for a legitimate purpose.

I’d have to agree with this, since it’s every tithers’ right to have a basic understanding of where their offerings are being applied.

Most of the ministries in question, however, are media based rather than churches, particularly in their TV wings, which is where the connection is made in this request for financial information, although some have churches attached to their ministries.

I would have thought tithes, if you agree with the principle, would have to go to the local church, or so we’ve been taught, anyway, rather than to a TV ministry, although I know Kenneth Copeland, for one, has suggested, in the past, at least, that tithes should go to his ministry, which I would disagree with, since he is a travelling Teacher/Prophet, not someone who oversees a local church. He is not involved in all the intricacies of local church leadership, including births, deaths and marriages, counselling, comforting, and the myriad hands-on work Pastors and their staff need to be able to handle. Those who go to his Eagle Mountain church would be encouraged to tithe there, but members of other churches world-wide shouldn’t be asked to tithe to his TV ministry, but, rather, give offerings if they so desire.

But I wonder how people on this blog feel about Grassley’s adherence to tithing as a principle, and as the basis for his enquiry into the workings of the said ministries.

Crossroads for FaceLift at Signposts02?

Is this the cue for the Last Post to be played on a morbid trumpet? It seems I’ve outlived my welcome here at Signposts02, according to some commenters on groupsects.

Greg the Explorer, who is a sporadic commenter here, made the observation:

‘Isee also that Signposts 2 is not happy with this group of Danny lovers! They really should change te name of their blog – they don;t have a blog that is a shado of the original signposts and they actually insult it’s memory by assoicating themsleves with it’.

I am unable to respond on groupsects, being banned, so I dropped Greg a line, now possibly in moderation, on his blog, as follows:

Hi Greg! All the best with your blog.

I read this on groupsects, and wanted to respond, but I’m banned. You said:

‘I see also that Signposts 2 is not happy with this group of Danny lovers! They really should change the name of their blog – they don’t have a blog that is a shadow of the original signposts and they actually insult it’s memory by associating themsleves with it.’

Which may or may not be true, but I’ll take it as a reasonable criticism. I’m sure you’re very disappointed with what happened to Signposts, as I was, having just entered the blog a few weeks before it closed. But they were right to close down, as long as Lance was being what he was, there was a real danger of litigation, which was clearly their greatest fear.

Thankfully he has toned down and is far more civilised on his present blog, although he still comes close to the mark on occasion, in my opinion.

But as for insulting Signposts, how can that be a fair comment? Things move on, according to personnel. You have every opportunity to bridge the gap by posting on Signposts02. I suggest you contact speckandplanks, and find out how to contribute. He is still overseeeing the blog, although he doesn’t comment as much, or put up posts.

I expect you’re beef is chiefly with me, since I seem to be doing most of the posting at present, and you are less than empathetic with my Christian outlook. After all, I’m a Pentecostal, and I actually like some of the people and ministries you take exception to. But, rather than complain about the direction Signposts02 has taken, why not action your thoughts by posting something which will stir people up?

The way I see it, a blog should be allowed to continue as long as there is a community, however large or small, that is willing to contribute, and thus far, most posts have a reasonable response quota.

But if you’d like to see a different approach to some of the posts there, then I have placed the ball squarely in your court.

Regards,
FaceLift

Then, not knowing this, obviously, RP added the following on groupsects, clearly in reference to my contributions:

‘Greg, the only commenter there who’s unhappy with this group is the usual one. That one is also almost the only one doing posts now. The blog should probably be renamed after him. Its my fault, since I originally gave him the power to author, in a spirit of non-ownership of that online community. Now that Lance is allowing comments here, that blog has done its job in allowing that community to chat somewhere in the meantime. Email any complaints to S&P, who is the administrator, and the only one with the ability to change things.’

Now, this discussion may or may not continue over at groupsects, much to the delight of Lance, if it continues in this vein, I imagine, but, nevertheless, I will put myself in the hands of regular commenters here, and let you decide my fate.

In fact it seems that moves are afoot to have things terminated one way or another as I write.

But first I’ll say that the main reason I have continued to post here, is that this blog has threatened, a few times, to die completely. I may not be everyone’s cup of tea, but all I’ve done is maintained a flow, and posted honestly, according to my convictions. It is not my fault that others have not chosen to contribute on a more regular basis.

I would probably not have posted comments about groupsects here had I been allowed to contribute there, or had my blog-name kept out of discussions there, as I am unable to comment in defence of my position, or to repent if found wrong about an issue.

That is, I would not post, unless I found groupsects, as with any blog, anywhere, to have been out of order on an issue, and posted a due opinion. The day bloggers are censured for this is a sad day for commentary.

All blogs and bloggers are in the public domain and subject to comment and criticism, unless moderation is applied. Here, there is no moderation per cé, so comments are open and relatively free. Groupsects has the luxury of a moderation system which can cut out comments at the whim of the blog moderator. In short, it is well defended already against controversy in its own right, but should be subject to reasonable criticism, like all sites, and all posts, including mine, on other blogs.

I expressed my position on Signposts02 in my earlier comment to Greg, who now claims that this has become a counter-site for groupsects, which, if anyone comes here regularly will attest, is untrue.

I have, in fact, recently, added three posts, including this one, directly referencing groupsects, out of many posts I’ve personally added on a range of issues. One post criticising the thread, not the post, of a groupsects post. One! And two, including this one, which is really a reply to Signposters, not groupsects, in response to comments made about FaceLift on groupsects, without right of reply!

If you feel I should go, I will. Just say the word, or ask S&P to pull the plug. It would be a great victory for Lance, of course, as he would be allowed to continue his assault on Pentecostals and Pastors virtually unchecked, and with the backing of the residue of ex-Signposts contributors.

I don’t think that was ever the intention of the original Signposts either, and would be an extreme position they would never condone or support. 

But that is not really my problem. I am not the blog-master at Signposts02. I am a person who has been given the privilege of posting opinion, for which I am grateful to RP and S&P. I don’t see why RP or anyone should be expected to apologise for this. In fact, I think she should be applauded for allowing herself, at one time anyway, to have that kind of refreshing openness to a variety of opinions. Or should we only have one kind of argument or opinion on this kind of site, and complete agreement in all comments?

One other thing, should I be axed, or this blog deleted, simply because I post here, or have criticised aspects of groupsects modus operandi, the argument against censorship or expulsion of members with a contrary opinion by Senior Ministers of large churches would be forever lost by those who champion sites like groupsects, especially in view of the fact that I have only ever given my personal opinion, and that Pentecostals should be allowed a defence of their position without fear of exclusion or expulsion by those who disagree.

I leave it with you…

Billy Graham’s Aussie revival

A fascinating documentary on the ABC’s Compass last night showed how enthralled Aussies were when Billy Graham first came here in the late 50’s.

Massive crowds gathered during 15 weeks of meetings, which were covered by all media outlets, radio being beamed live to many churches and meeting halls across the country. Thousands gave their lives to Jesus, and many hundreds swarmed forward at altar calls for rededication.

I had always thought that there had been no major revival in Australia, but it must be said that if these meetings didn’t constitute some form of revival, then it would be hard to know what actually counts!

The direct results of this revival lasted  a few years, in fact, with crime rates, drunkenness and teenage pregnancies dramatically decreasing, that is, until, perhaps coincidentally, the rock’n'roll revolution introduced a different kind of thinking to the more conservative ’50’s Australia.

There is still a lasting legacy, however, with barely a congregation which doesn’t have a member or two who came to Christ through these meetings. Add to this some key leaders, like Archbishop Jensen, of the Sydney diocese, who gave testimony of being changed at these meetings.

Graham is in his 90’s now, and son Franklin continues the legacy, but the impact on this nation remains.

Nalliah prophecy claims fall short!

“I saw a man firing randomly with a weapon at people on the streets and many were falling dead. I was very disturbed and was crying. Then the scene changed and I saw fire everywhere with flames burning very high and uncontrollably. With this I awoke from my dream with the interpretation as the following words came to me in a flash from the Spirit of God,  ‘My wrath is about to be released upon Australia, in particular Victoria, for approving the slaughter of the innocent children in the womb.  Now, call on My people to repent and pray!’”

So the prophecy goes, claimed, by Danny Nalliah to point to the deadly bush fires in Victoria this last week.

The thing is, if this is God’s judgement for Victoria’s recent abortion laws, where was the gunman? 

It is an almost certain fact that there will be bush fires somewhere in Australia. Entire departments and teams of volunteers and professionals are dedicated to the task of protecting lives and property in every State and Territory of Australia. Having a serious bush fire in Australia during bush fire season is practically inevitable.

Jesus told us that it rains on the just and the unjust, that natural disasters would be a sign of the times, not a sign of God’s judgement. There are many sound commentaries on this, particularly in light of Nalliah’s claims.

Could this be plain opportunism by Nalliah? To what end?

Whatever his motives, or understanding of scripture, his theology has the potential of further polarising Christians, particularly if we allow this kind of doctrine to become the darling of media resentment of the Church, because there are, amazingly, some who accept what the ‘prophet’ says, and even believe he is right, whilst on the other side, most Christians are horrified by this kind of judgmental theology.

The voices of sound teaching need to be loud and clear right now, and not allow wrong prophecy an ascendancy, especially if opportunists like the Westborough mob in US gain media attention. We should pray for Christian leaders everywhere to be strong in their condemnation of false prophecy.

Groupsects’ Nalliah abuse unnecessary

Whatever you may think or say about Danny Nalliah, he is a Christian and a brother, so whilst people can and perhaps should condemn his declaration of God’s judgement being poured out on Victoria, wishing death or injury to his person is both unnecessary and unchristian.

In a post which criticises Nalliah, groupsects has permitted, without rebuke or moderation, commenters to make what could be construed as death-wishes, if not actual death-threats, which can only provoke a claim of persecution by Nalliah’s supporters, of whom there are many.

For instance, in reference to Nalliah, commenter Boris says, ‘This clown should be set on fire‘. This is followed up with weez’s comment, ‘What sin could I commit that would cause JUST Nalliah to burst into flames?‘, to which Lionfish adds, ‘You could commit Murder by flame thrower‘, and throws in the  just-in-case get-out-of-jail-card, ‘For legal reasons Lionfish does not recomend anyone taking this action’.

ONLY FOR LEGAL REASONS, LIONFISH?

Astonishing!

Does groupsects moderate this, or condemn it? On the contrary, he champions weez’s sentiments, by saying, ‘You’re still up for Comment Of The Week for “What sin could I commit that would cause JUST Nalliah to burst into flames?”’

Really?

Nalliah isn’t new to death treats. But fuelling his version of Christianity with these kinds of comment only adds to his ‘resume’.

Danny Nalliah rebuked by Senior Pastor

A sharp rebuke from Mark Connor , who is not Danny Nalliah’s Pastor, but is a Senior Pastor in Victoria, highly respected by Pentecostals and evangelicals, brings into perspective the latest ‘prophecy’ from Danny, who publicly stated the Victorian fires were judgement from God for new abortion laws.

Connor writes:

Have you noticed that any time there is a tragedy or disaster in our world, some self-appointed prophet(s) starts to speak out and talk about the judgment of God? Someone suddenly remembers a vision or a dream they had. They start to casts stones and place all sorts of guilt on people. 

[Danny Nahlia[sic] from ‘Catch the Fire’ Ministries is a classic example of this. Click here to read his public statement and here for a recent Sydney Morning Herald article where he is quoted. At times like this, Danny is an embarassment to the Christian church, as he does not speak on behalf of the majority of Christians and churches, let alone God]

I think we need to be very cautious in how we approach this. Who are we to say that these bush fires are the judgment of God? What about that person who died in a car accident last week, that person who died of sickness yesterday, or that couple who haven’t been able to have children? Are they too under the judgment of God because something bad has happened to them? Is any negative experience of human suffering an indication of the judgment of God? I think we are unwise to make such arrogant statements, as if we have God’s full perspective on life’s uncertainties. 

In Jesus’ time, there were a number of tragedies that took place (see Luke 13:1-5). Pilate killed a some Galileans and mixed their blood with sacrifices (“human evil”) and then a tower (the Tower of Siloam) collapsed and killed eighteen people (“natural evil”). Jesus addressed these two current issues but he didn’t explain ‘why’ they had happened. What he did say, however, was insightful. He said, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them-do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you, no! But unless you repent, you too will all perish.” 

The truth is that we live in an era of grace, when God is withholding wrath so sinners can repent. Jesus himself said he had not come to condemn the world, but so that the world could be saved. People condemn themselves by their unbelief, but the time of God’s judgement and final wrath is yet to arrive. When it comes it will be terrible, and woe to those who remain in the earth, but for now, at least, God’s long-suffering is accorded towards us.

Sadly, Danny, and Catch the Fire Ministries, appear to make it very difficult to express disagreement on their blog by being seemingly selective about comments. I and others I’ve heard of, have had comments moderated. These were reasonable comments, not rude or aggressive hate-mail, nor could they be considered persecution. As an experiment I once added a positive comment under the same blog name, and it got through!

Declaring yourself to be  Prophet of God is a serious business. We live under the New Covenant, and no longer stone false prophets, as people were obliged to do under the Old Covenant, but we need to be certain that if our prophecies do not come to pass, we acknowledge the error, and be very careful about declaring ‘Thus says the Lord” without his full consent.

Catch the Fire Ministries are giving aid to victims of the fires, and this is commendable, but they need to understand how and when God releases judgement in this age of His grace and mercy.

Mark Connor is a sound voice with enough sense to point out the error, as he says:

Jesus makes it clear that when something bad happens it doesn’t mean that the person(s) affected by suffering are necessarily sinful or evil. Good and evil does not fall on people in some sort of vindictive manner. Jesus doesn’t say that these people are ‘under the judgment of God’ either. If he didn’t, why are we so quick to?