Mark 8

vs 1

See, I read this one verse, and I can see what's coming.

vs 2

Similar situation. Come on guys, you can put 1 and 1 together!

vs 3

Look, he doesn't want to send them away. They're hungry. What will you do?

vs 4

See? Come on, guys. Even the average joe, having heard Jesus heals people, brings someone on the assumption he can do it twice.

vs 5

Seven. More than last time, but with no fish.

vs 6

Again, following a similar formula.

vs 7

Unless a few was a few thousand, we're not really changing anything from last time.

vs 8

I wish I was there. I personally have no need to see miracles per se, but this one is just too awesome. It's my favourite, I think, and not because it feeds people. It is just so unexplainable.

vs 9

Is that men, women, children? Doesn't say. Still a heap.

vs 10

I love that they follow him for days, he feeds them, then just dismisses them as if class is over, and off they go on their next adventure.

vs 11

Perhaps they were just hungry, and bummed they missed out on the bread.

vs 12

Ouch. Although, it's not as if he hasn't given a heap of signs, and isn't about to give yet more. So why even say it? Perhaps this is linked to the whole 'faith that saved you' thing. Jesus doesn't just do miracles for entertainment. Sure, when he does them people might see them, but much of what he does is about compassion as well as testament.

vs 13

Quick boat trip, that.

vs 14

What happened to all those baskets? Perhaps they distributed them among the people.

vs 15

Just... I mean, he says Pharisees and Herod right there. Unless they own bakeries, how could anyone mistake what he's talking about? You know, I bet they did have their own bakeries.

vs 16

Of course it is. That makes perfect sense. Only possible explanation.

vs 17

I suppose the answer is yes.

vs 18

Seriously guys, after all Jesus has said and done, does he have to use these words to describe his closest posse?

vs 19

They remember the details.

vs 20

Seriously! It was in the same chapter! Not that that necessarily reflects chronology, but it was obviously put here for a reason.

vs 21

Note that Jesus doesn't explain it to them, nor us. You would have to be thick not to get it. But people are thick. That's why we need preachers.

vs 22

New story, new cripple, another miracle, we assume.

vs 23

Again, we have the spitting in the eyes, the rubbing, as if Jesus needed to clean his eyes off or something. But Jesus can bring people to life by telling them to stand. He can heal people's daughters without seeing them. So what is the purpose?

vs 24

The blind man, he can see something, but it looks like trees. Obviously this guy wasn't born blind - he knows what trees look like.

vs 25

Which, you know, is awesome. This guy is obviously going to be happy with this.

vs 26

And once again, Jesus tells him to keep it secret. Best of luck keeping that you aren't blind any more a secret. You might be able to do it if you have a white cane and a labrador, I suppose. But this story starts and ends, and we're left thinking, "Okay, so Jesus heals a blind man. Big deal, he's healed plenty." Why pick this story out? Because of the spit on the eyes thing? Okay, great, what does that tell us about Jesus, that his power is running low? Obviously not. The answer, I think, lies in the story that follows. This is just one example of why we can't read things purely in isolation. You need context. It's vital.

vs 27

What's the next story about? Well, Jesus wants to know what his reputation is among the people, who they think he is, how they explain his miracles and teaching.

vs 28

All good answers, really. You might think it's funny that he's not just allowed to be Jesus, but remember, people thought the prophecy was that Elijah would return, so you sort of look for him.

vs 29

Huzzah for Peter! So now we see a little bit of why the miracle was put above - Peter's eyes have been opened. He can see the truth.

vs 30

And once again, Jesus gives his strange, messianic secret warning. I think we've talked about this a fair bit, so we'll move on from it for now.

vs 31

This is obviously a strange teaching to hear when you've just heard Jesus call himself the Messiah - or at least agree to it. We don't expect our powerful leader figures to talk about them being captured and killed.

vs 32

Peter is obviously thinking what I would be thinking - don't ruin the moral of the team!

vs 33

And so now we see that, sometimes, people's heart's blindness can only be partially cured at first. I suppose sometimes we all see Jesus as just a tree walking around, and not in the stark relief that we should.

vs 34

Strong, terribly powerful words. Jesus makes it clear - not just to the twelve, but all the disciples, that his way is a way of death. It's at about this time we would be calling it a cult.

vs 35

The eternal reward picture is strong. It takes a lot for people to be prepared to risk their lives. Of course, not everything people risk their lives for is eternal. Makes me wonder about communist rebels, though - they really want to go and die for the greater good? Strongly held, if a little mistaken, beliefs there.

vs 36

Obviously not much good. But do we think about this enough? I know I certainly don't. I quite like the world sometimes. Particular bits of it. Are they worth my eternal soul? Damn, hard saying.

vs 37

Well, lots. But is it worth it is the question. I mean, mad guitar skills? So the story goes, anyway.

vs 38

I wonder how many people turned around and just walked away here, thinking, "Take up cross? Lose your soul? This is too much. I liked him better when he healed blind people." It sounds crazy, but a lot of people say it now, "I like what he has to say about loving your neighbour, but I don't like what he has to say about righteousness or hell." So I imagine it was similar back then.

Mark 7

vs 1

Are they a posse, or just come to visit?

vs 2

Not just that they hadn't washed their hands - that they hadn't followed a religious rule made up by the pharisees.

vs 3

See, tradition.

vs 4

Nice of Mark to explain it for us. Just a little note that helps us recognise that this gospel isn't written just for Jews, or else why include something like this?

vs 5

A fair enough question, if you're in charge of religious decision-making for your people. Or at least you think you are.

vs 6

Ouch! Hot damn, that's harsh. Jesus calls a spade a spade. I mean, we wouldn't know if they really cared about God and just had it wrong. But Jesus knows.

vs 7

Isn't it awesome that while the Bible might not have a verse for everything, it's got a verse for an awful lot of specifics, and it seems to have killer cool prophecies for Jesus to fulfil or see fulfilled.

vs 8

See, it wouldn't be so bad if they had not let go of God's traditions. I think so, anyway.

vs 9

See, they have to set aside God's laws to follow the traditions of people. That's just stupid. Surely God's laws would trump a man's laws.

vs 10

Which I personally think is rather harsh, but hey, that's just me. That doesn't mean they shouldn't follow it. Should we put people to death? No. But we should obviously treat dishonouring parents as important.

vs 11

The concept is a little strange, but takes us into the mind of these people. They would claim that it is more important to give to God's temple than to support your family. Very basically.

vs 12

As I said above, the idea was that you should devote stuff to God, and in doing so if your parents starved or something, well, that's just that. God is more important. And you know what, I can see where they're coming from, too. I mean, I would find it easy to think this way.

vs 13

But God wants the former without the latter being undone. And Jesus points out that this isn't the only example.

vs 14

What a powerful statement. Remember, there are laws in the OT that actually do talk about religious uncleanness. What Jesus is saying is quite radical. But it's true. Touching a dead body doesn't make you sinful because it's a dead body. It makes you sinful because God made a law, and you broke it.

vs 15[16]

This puzzled me for ages! The Biblegateway version is missing any notes, or even the number 15! Very strange, just a typo methinks.

vs 17

Not what I'd call a parable, but that's what Mark calls it.

vs 18

Ouch, Jesus is on an insult streak today. Even his disciples are copping it. Although, it seems a fairly clear lesson to me. But then, I don't have hundreds of years of culture telling me it's wrong.

vs 19

Mark makes it clear what Jesus is saying, that all food is clean. It's not clear from the words he records, though. Mark is putting the interpretation on it for us.

vs 20

That is, your actions. Like eating something you shouldn't.

vs 21

It's quite a list. But it is interesting to think about - that these things come from within us. But so often, don't we try and hold things outside us responsible? Pornography, movies, poor education, whatever. Sure, they don't help. But the sin comes from us.

vs 22

The list goes on.

vs 23

And of course evil defiles us. That is, it makes us unable to come to God. But Jesus thankfully does away with that, so we can.

vs 24

I think sometimes Jesus just wanted some privacy for prayer and general health and wellbeing. He wasn't trying to be a ninja, it's just that the thousand people who see you now don't realise you just spent three hours preaching to the thousand people you saw you a few hours ago.

vs 25

This is not an uncommon occurrence for Jesus.

vs 26

But this is a little new. Greeks weren't often going to come and throw themselves at the feet of a Jewish messiah. For one, why would they believe anything would happen? For two, why would a Jewish messiah help a Greek person? But desperate times call for desperate measures.

vs 27

A lovely thought, isn't it, that Jesus is referring to this Greek woman as a dog. But you know what? Jesus spoke to her! We must assume in Greek. I would doubt she was speaking Aramaic. So there, Jesus spoke Greek.

vs 28

This is a ballsy answer. A lot of people would have said, "Dog? You son of a bitch." But her daughter is possessed, that's all she cares about, and so she is prepared to accept Jesus' words at face value, and tell him that even if it is true that she is unworthy of all that Jesus might be, can't she at least have the scraps of what's left over? Because for her, even that is enough to heal her daughter.

vs 29

Jesus got the right answer - it accepted the primacy of the Jews in God's plan, but it also allowed for gentiles to be involved. Plus, it accepted that even if Jesus was to give a tiny amount to her, she felt that would be enough, because he is so powerful. So he heals her daughter. That's killer sweet.

vs 30

And that's the end of that story. Happy ending!

vs 31

This is the same sort of area where that ex-Legion guy was meant to go preach.

vs 32

That the people who brought this deaf man were begging is probably a sign they cared about the outcome.

vs 33

Considering that he just healed a woman's daughter without even seeing her, the whole spitting thing seems a little strange here. Is it to show something? The earlier context doesn't really seem to reveal anything. Perhaps something comes after it.

vs 34

Kind of an interesting thing to say - I mean, Jesus does talk about people whose ears are closed. Perhaps that's the thing he's going for?

vs 35

Huzzah for him! I can't imagine what it's like not being able to speak properly. I have enough problems sometimes as it is. I was saying 'like' so much in the car on the way home, I felt like such a moron. I think I was tired. But to be unable to express yourself for a long time... blergh.

vs 36

Is that why he does it, reverse psychology? It just doesn't sound like that's the reason.

vs 37

That's really just a restatement of his actions. Perhaps this is what the problem is? That when people go and tell Jesus' story, they repeat the miracles, but not his words? So Jesus tells some people to preach, but others he tells to keep silent. Perhaps the ones he lets preach are the ones who will tell the whole story.

Mark 6

Only have 20 minutes before I have to catch my bus!

vs 1

More travel, always on the move, Jesus was.

vs 2

Because all of that stuff - his teaching, authority, miracles - are all pretty awesome in and of themselves. It's also cool that Jesus would visit synagogues and teach there. He's not a rebel - he worked within the system too. Synagogues, then, are a human construction that God seemed to be happy with at the time.

vs 3

Unfortunately, it's harder to accept something awesome from someone when you've seen them as a child. That's just life. This is nothing new for Jesus. If you're a king, but not born in a castle, it's a hard life.

vs 4

He says it a little differently in John, but the principle is the same. That sort of closeness of relationship is a negative the more official recognition of position.

vs 5

Could not sounds so constraining. But here is a fantastic thing that we see in this verse - miracles are not there for those who lack faith. If the argument is, "People don't believe, quick, do some miracles!" you will see that's not Jesus' ministry at all. These people lack faith, and so he does hardly any miracles.

vs 6

And so are we, who would have given our right foot to be there and meet Jesus. Funny how things work. To us he's messiah and God, to them he's the carpenter's son.

More travelling.

vs 7

Just the twelve, but it's a good start. You see he doesn't send them out alone, but in pairs. I think that's important. Got someone to watch your back.

vs 8

This verse is probably the one that we can most pin "faith" ministries on - the idea that you go out with nothing, and God will provide you with whatever you need. And you know what? That's absolutely true. But the problem is that some people go out in "faith", and then when the money/stuff/whatever does not come to keep them there, they get stubborn, and stay anyway, saying, "Must faith harder," which in effect means bugging people at home to send them money. Honestly, some people are not meant to be out there, I reckon. Jesus was right there, and sent them out, pointed them in the direction. Obviously it's a little bit different now, where Jesus isn't standing there with an arrow.

This is obviously different to when people find themselves in a situation not of their making - like the Christians in the diaspora. They just hit the ground where they were shoved to, and started doing Christiany stuff.

vs 9

Take everything you need, and nothing more, I guess is the lesson here.

vs 10

So the first house that accepts them, they stay in. They don't house-hop. What a different culture we have.

vs 11

Jesus has it all worked out. Their ministry is going to be simple, but still profound.

vs 12

Their job was to preach to people about repentance. Repentance meant something to these people. They'd heard this message before both historio-culturally (exile) and recently and popularly (John the Baptist). It doesn't work quite as well if people aren't ready for it.

vs 13

These things also work better when Jesus is around, but that doesn't mean they don't work at all. Just that it would seem that, even in the olden days, miracles were rare and special, except when something super killer awesome was happening, like Jesus.

That's all the time I've got, folks. More Mark 6 later!

vs 14

You've got to admit, it would be pretty freaky to think someone you had beheaded has come back to life more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

vs 15

This is not really much more comforting, although perhaps less believable due to the time difference. What I mean by that is it's more likely to be not accepted simply because more people would think, "Magical figure, John the Baptist!" since they'd seen him recently.

vs 16

See, he went for the former.

vs 17

We now get a little backwards rewind, to see why this would freak Herod out so much. It all started with throwing John in prison.

vs 18

Which I suppose it isn't.

vs 19

It's a funny thing how spiteful some people can be. I guess Herodias was quite happy to be living in the palace.

vs 20

So Herod feared John, but did he divorce Herodias? No. But he listened to John, and that could lead to some action, so best to take matters into one's hands quickly.

vs 21

As rich and powerful people are wont to do.

vs 22

This sort of largesse is typical, because it both shows his pleasure, and also his power.

vs 23

That's a big promise. Of course, if you asked for that, you'd probably get a dirty look.

vs 24

Fat lot of good it will do for the daughter - except perhaps let her stay in the palace longer too.

vs 25

How gruesome. She'd better have been an awesome dancer.

vs 26

Of course. Can't be soft on prophets in an election year.

vs 27

Lucky John was in prison. Well, not so lucky for John.

vs 28

How lovely. Mother's day cards and a box of chocolates eat your heart out.

vs 29

And Jesus doesn't resurrect him. That would be hella freaky, without a head.

vs 30

Now that our flashback is over, we can return to the story of the twelve and their doings.

vs 31

Jesus is all about rest, and private time. You'd think he'd be all hyperactive healing as many people and preaching as often as he could. But no, even Jesus needed quiet time.

vs 32

Lots of boat travel. Beats walking.

vs 33

They ran! That's how excited the people were to see Jesus.

vs 34

They wanted to hear Jesus teach, so he taught them. The opportunity was there, and even though his disciples were tired and hungry, he still took the opportunity. So the lesson is, take rests and look after yourself, but if someone interrupts your dinner to ask you about Jesus, then tell them.

vs 35

They did pick a remote spot, after all.

vs 36

Remember, McDonald's hadn't opened its Galilee branches yet. It was actually not going to be easy to just pick up food for thousands of people. Like the disciples say, they would need to go to a bunch of surrounding villages, and forage the countryside.

vs 37

Did they have that much in the kitty? Perhaps, they did distribute to the poor after all. Funny, Jesus doesn't 'cure' poverty with a wave of his hand. He gives people money.

vs 38

Not exactly a feast. I could eat that, I reckon.

vs 39

Ahh, the green grass. How picturesque. I've never noticed that before.

vs 40

It's like huge dinner parties, or wedding receptions, all over the place.

vs 41

When you read it like that, it sounds like they are awfully small bits of food, or really, really big loaves and fish.

vs 42

So they're either all on that weight loss stuff that fills your stomach with foam, or there was lots of food.

vs 43

Truly, I think this is my favourite miracle. It shows Jesus' over creation in a quite incredible way. There is simply no way to explain this miracle without miracle (not if you take it that Jesus somehow made the food appear. If you want to get all, "Oh, the people produced their own packed lunches," that's not a miracle, that's a picnic). It flies totally in the face of anything science can explain - unless there's a paper in the journal Nature that has something on spontaneous bakery.

vs 44

Lots of men. Who knows how many people there were! If only we had Jesus catering at Ministry of Game.

Making the last big push this morning.

vs 45

Immediately. Like, the moment they'd finished eating, bam! Return to your homes, nothing to see here.

vs 46

Interesting that the immediacy of the dispersal comes after Jesus had wanted some quiet time, got a huge group of hungry people foisted on him, and he helped them. But right afterwards, he shooed them away and went and prayed. I never noticed that before.

vs 47

Oh, I wonder what's going to happen? Only one verse ago I was learning something new, and yet I can see how easy it is to want to gloss over known stories.

vs 48

It's almost like Jesus thinks, "They can do it, I'll just let them row their hearts out after having done it all night." But then he has mercy.

vs 49

In the meantime, they see him out there, and freak the hell out. Which probably doesn't help their situation any.

vs 50

You'd think after hanging around Jesus for a while, things would get blazé. But no! There's still things that terrify them. Lucky Jesus is there to give them a pep talk.

vs 51

Of course, once Jesus is in the boat, he doesn't feel like a rough ride, so he calms things down.

vs 52

See, Jesus expects people to have a big picture view of him and God. If God can feed 5000 men on a hill with a loaf of bread and a can of sardines, he can do anything. So as if he's going to let his disciples die in a boating accident. We've been here before. But they still don't get it. They can't accept that level of faith. And so they're described as having hard hearts.

vs 53

With, you know, an anchor or something.

vs 54

Jesus is becoming a celebrity. I'm surprised there wasn't a little fleet of boats following him.

vs 55

I wonder how many people brought sick loved ones, and how many people just grabbed the nearest beggar and pulled them towards Jesus in the hope of seeing another healing.

vs 56

The incidence of terrible illness must have dropped pretty significantly during Jesus' little three year tour. I wonder if it had an impact on the population? Probably had an impact on how well Christianity was received. Or possibly not, considering how many people who were healed seemed not to turn around and Thank Jesus for it sometimes.

Mark 5

vs 1

So they crossed the lake.

vs 2

Tombs aren't a nice place to live. Also, they're unclean.

vs 3

So, he was strong - either that or darn wily. Although why they wanted to bind him with a chain is not yet apparent.

vs 4

Definitely strong, possibly slightly wily - wilyness uncertain.

vs 5

This is I think what is called 'high risk' behaviour these days. Obviously this is not typical for your average social person. As actions go for crazy hermits, I'm not sure where this is on the scale.

vs 6

This is better than getting punched to custard, so it's a win.

vs 7

Now, if you were the average person, and you didn't know that Jesus had driven out evil spirits before, and that they would regularly address him in this way, you might thin it odd that someone pleads that Jesus doesn't torture him.

Even then, though, you may still wonder about the whole "Jesus/God torturing demons" thing. Perhaps torture is sometimes appropriate.

vs 8

Okay, so Jesus had actually tried something on the demon, and now it was begging.

vs 9

I wasn't really aware demons had names (did Adam name them? not important), but this is probably a good illustration, like an object lesson, for Jesus' disciples.

vs 10

Why does the demon ( or the demons) want this? It's not explained. I guess some people might say that they don't want to go back to hell, but really, they get a reprieve of about 10 seconds in that case. Also, I think that's making some assumptions about hell that probably aren't well backed up.

vs 11

They would occasionally eat the corpses. I'm just kidding. Or am I?

vs 12

Again, why? Who can question the desires of demons, really.

vs 13

Which sucks if you own a herd of 2,000 pigs. I mean, that's a hell of a lot of pigs. Now, normally, a Jew wouldn't farm pigs I'm guessing (I mean, what would they do with them?). But still, that probably represents a rather big hit to someone's bottom line.

vs 14

Because, that's a hell of a lot of pigs to end up drowning in a lake.

vs 15

Because people who help hermits are scary. Or probably more reasonably, because people who can help a hermit who was so out of it as him are probably powerful. And that can be scary.

vs 16

And why not? It's a good story, and quite relevant to the time. "Those there told the others about the scores in a recent game of football" would be rather more confusing.

vs 17

Before he kills more livestock. You'd think they might ask how he did it, but no, all they want is the pig-killer to leave.

vs 18

He's a good beggar, this man, although apparently the demons were better and begging than him.

vs 19

It was a fair bit of mercy. About 2,000 pigs worth. It was also a mercy to the demons, apparently, which is a hugely confusing thing to think about. Probably why I don't think about it much. If God can show mercy to fallen demons, that doesn't really impact me a huge amount, except to prove something I already know - that God is good at mercy. But Jesus here is showing mercy to demons, to this guy by giving him a purpose in life and driving out his demons, and to the people of his village by sending him to them to tell them about Jesus.

vs 20

And rightly so. I mean, it's pretty amazing stuff. But what gets me is that Jesus sets in train very early on in his ministry a pattern of people telling people about him, and those people believing. That's no different to you or me, who never got to meet Jesus face to face.

vs 21

So wait, he sailed all the way over there just to heal this guy? That's service!

vs 22

Jesus must have gotten used to this. I've never had anyone fall at my feet, except by accident.

vs 23

Not an uncommon occurrence.

vs 24

So Jesus follows. I've also never had a huge crowd follow me around, or even been in a huge crowd trying to get to one person.

vs 25

Which could no doubt mean all sorts of things. But obviously isn't healthy.

vs 26

I'm sure there are many people who could testify to the truth of this statement in their own lives. Good to know that doctors stick to this tradition.

vs 27

Because cloaks have obvious healing powers. It's funny how people think about this stuff.

vs 28

Which, hey, turned out to be true. So she perhaps knows more about it than me.

vs 29

Which must have been a huge relief.

vs 30

The obvious absurdity of this question should be apparent.

vs 31

It's not lost on the disciples.

vs 32

Why is it he does this? Perhaps it is to call her out, to make her stand up for her faith, to show that it has healed her. I mean, obviously Jesus knows who it is, but he wants them to admit it.

vs 33

Why was she so afraid? Because she stole healing off him?

vs 34

Not his cloak, but her faith. Obviously in him, that he could do it.

vs 35

That's bad news. Perhaps if he didn't heal that woman, the girl would be alive. Perhaps if thousands of people didn't crowd around Jesus, he could have walked faster.

vs 36

This is a ballsy statement. I mean, healing is one thing, but this girl is dead. And it's not like they had no idea when someone was alive or dead. But even if they got it wrong, it's gutsy if you don't already know you can bring someone back from the dead.

vs 37

Why is this? Perhaps because he wanted to actually get there before midnight, but perhaps because he works on this pattern of him doing things, and other people having to take someone else's word that it's true.

vs 38

Typical cultural reaction to death. Watch a Muslim funeral in Palestine some day.

vs 39

He has not even seen her. They probably watched her die - or were called in afterwards to wail and mourn.

vs 40

Regardless, stating a dead person isn't dead makes Jesus a laughingstock. So Jesus sends them all away, except his three and the parents.

vs 41

Why does he record it in Aramaic? I assume because Jesus said it in Aramaic. But why here? Not sure. Perhaps he speaks to her in Aramaic because she's young, and that's the language most spoken in the home?

vs 42

So almost marrying age, would be a real loss to the family. A huge win for Jesus here, showing that patience is a virtue. Also, that he has power over death.

vs 43

Perhaps Jesus didn't want every man jack bringing out their dead and asking Jesus to raise them. That would kind of suck. Or perhaps he wanted some of his better stories to leak out later. I mean, obviously people were told, because we know about it. And I for one and glad, it's a cool story.

Mark 4

vs 1

You might remember that I preached a sermon on a good part of this chapter, so a lot of this might be repetition.

Also, you might remember that last chapter Jesus asked his disciples to set up a boat for just such an occasion. It's as if he's prescient or something.

vs 2

One of the things he taught them was this.

vs 3

As they do.

vs 4

Not the most effective way to sow seed, perhaps he was feeling rushed.

vs 5

I guess you might have occasional rocky patches on your land, but again, not the best place to sow seed.

vs 6

I'm not much of a horticulturalist, so I'll just take people who have 1st century farming skills at their word.

vs 7

I hate weeds, but that's about as far as I go. Again, others do the gardening.

vs 8

This I can at least attest to, having been in a wheat field and seen (and eaten) bits of grain off a wheat stalk. I don't suggest it - it's much better when ground up and baked into bread.

vs 9

And that's the end of the story. And people go... er, what?

vs 10

Thankfully, or we'd all be in the dark.

vs 11

This is quite a phenomenal statement. We are often struck by it, which is kind of nice, considering that I think we like to think, "Hey, that's not very fair and democratic. Why can't everyone hear the message?" Very communist of us, well done. But in fact, we live in a society where things are advertised to certain groups of people, and are sometimes basically put in code so that others don't understand/aren't interested.

vs 12

Of course, the difference between not wanting to buy cornflakes and not going to heaven might be seen by some to be rather more serious. There's really only two ways to understand it. One is that Jesus knows who should and shouldn't hear, and so tailors his message accordingly. The other is that it's a matter of your own heart, and so the blame is shifted squarely to you. Or a mix of both, I guess, because as I have said in the past, theological paradox does not necessitate dichotomy.

vs 13

Note that I don't think he is saying, "This parable is a key to unlocking all other parables." I think he is saying, "If you can't solve an easy sudoku, you can't solve a master sudoku."

vs 14

Who is the farmer? Apparently not important. Could be God, Jesus, any of us. Jesus doesn't say. What is interesting to consider is that even though it's terrible farming practice, whoever sows the word sows it so that the people who probably won't react to it still at least hear it.

vs 15

Satan's role is important. As I said in my sermon, it's worth remembering that it's not purely people's disinterest that keeps them deaf.

vs 16

Initial investment shows swift return - obviously a scam.

vs 17

This is a damn shame, but I think can be mitigated by explaining to people that with Christianity comes trouble.

vs 18

So the word is heard among the thorns, which is one nice thing.

vs 19

Note that only one kind of response is really wanted - fruit. It was this that made me want to translate the parable into something more akin to an 'all of life' story. Is that what Jesus is saying primarily? It's a good question. He doesn't specify, is my answer.

vs 20

I wish I were this fruitful. I didn't say it in my sermon, because it's a downer and it's not truly a correct way to measure your Christian life, but I wish I could say that 100 people would be in heaven because of me.

vs 21

I don't do either, but I at least know how light works. Also, putting an oil lamp under a bed is likely to set it on fire - which, hey, will generate a lot of light. Briefly.

vs 22

Jesus is saying that, even though he speaks in parables, the truth of God is a mystery meant to be revealed. Sure, some people won't get it, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't tell them. God wants revelation.

vs 23

Basically what I said above covers this little saying.

vs 24

It's like a justice plus mix. Extra berries.

vs 25

This often seems unfair, but again, we must all be communist, because this is exactly how capitalism works. Besides, since it is talking about understanding of God, I think those who have little probably won't care too much if they lose what they have. Not in the short term, anyway.

vs 26

Wait, didn't we just do this, Jesus?

vs 27

This is true. And sure, biologists will argue, but the simple fact is that Jesus meant "everyone but biologists, because they're pedants". Philosophers have no problem with this statement, because we're imaginative.

vs 28

That is how a seed grows, I assume. We even have one growing on the windowsill in the kitchen, but I didn't pay too much attention.

vs 29

That's how it works. What was this parable about? It's more farming practice. Obviously we must read it in the context of the parable of the sower (so perhaps it IS the key to understanding some parables!). We sow the seed, and others may reap it, but God makes it grow. Thank you, Paul.

vs 30

I don't know, Jesus, will you perhaps describe it with another seed analogy?

vs 31

Hah.

vs 32

Who are the birds? What colour is the seed? Why do they perch in the branches? I think it's just a big tree. Small amount seen now, big return in the future. That's the message. Kingdom is like that.

vs 33

And probably a little they couldn't. Or perhaps that's just me.

vs 34

The disciples were part of the plan, see. It's not about controlling flow of information, it is about sustained dissemination. Jesus was thinking long term.

vs 35

Of the lake, I assume.

vs 36

Jesus is an admiral of a little navy. I'd never noticed that before.

vs 37

I wonder if it affected the other boats?

vs 38

I've never been on a boat in a storm (well, kinda once on a ferry), but considering my general reaction to boats is the same as the disciples, even when it's not stormy, I feel for them.

vs 39

It's not as impressive when it doesn't work, trust me.

vs 40

Ouch. But when you think about it, as if the messiah was going to die in a boating accident. "He was drowned for our sins."

vs 41

The thing is, of course, that we're in early days, and they were still baffled at this man called Jesus. I live in a permanent state of bafflement about Jesus, so I am akin to them.

Mark 3 - remember Mark?

Wow, it's been a long time! Law and sermons and general distraction. Good to be back.

vs 1

Where else would he be? That actually brings up an interesting question to me. The laws of uncleanness stated things about the ability to enter the temple, but what about synagogue? Since synagogue is not a mechanism mentioned under law, I wonder if that means it's free from such strictures - in 1st century AD, anyway. I don't really care how modern Jews do it, as they're probably doing it wrong.

vs 2

Because of course someone doing a miracle is definitely what you want to catch them up on, if you want to prove they are not the messiah. I mean, it's not like they were expecting to find out that he had sent in a rigged man with a hand withered by special effects. They were going to try and prove Jesus wasn't the messiah by showing that he performs miracles. It's like they woke up without their brains.

vs 3

Jesus obviously did not wake up without his brain.

vs 4

Grrr, people who have already made their mind up about something are annoying. Jesus tries to teach them in words what he is going to show them in example, but they are stubbornly silent.

vs 5

Hah, for anyone who read my above post and was like, "Bit harsh to say grr and call them stubborn," Mark and Jesus both totally had my back. Even Jesus was angry at them. Now the thing is, Jesus trumps me, because he was also distressed about their stubbornness. I just mocked them. I love that some guy's life is totally changed by the tail end of one verse. "Oh, by the way, Jesus then healed him."

vs 6

"Damn that Jesus! He heals people, in front of everyone! In the synagogue! On God's holy day! He must be evil. Also, he's rubbing our faces in it about how awesome he is." I wish I could say I would have been smarter than them, but I'm sure this argument can be made very reasonably.

vs 7

Crowds. How many pharisees had crowds? Well, none any more, they were all following Jesus.

vs 8

Idumea? I looked it up, it's like the Samaria of the south, that isn't Moab. So people were coming from pretty far. This is like when you're at a big event like a wedding, and you say, "And thank you for all the people who travelled so far. We even have a couple all the way from Idumea!"

vs 9

Jesus liked his personal space.

vs 10

Or it was because of this. The last thing you want to soil your messiah credibility is a crowd stampede incident.

vs 11

I think Mark makes the most of this idea, but he's not the only one who mentions it, if I recall.

vs 12

And once again, Jesus tells them to be quiet about it. Not because he doesn't want people to know, but it's like if you were running for district attorney (yes, my analogy is going to be in American language because I have been so culturally imperialised), you would not want the Mafia to send representatives saying, "This man is a real badass. He arrests us all the time. You should totally hire him for the job," because you might think he's on the pull.

There is another thing, though. Remember that Jesus uses the term "Son of Man" for himself, not Son of God. Son of God, whilst it might be a true statement at face value, had been impregnated with all these ideas, some which were unwelcome to Jesus. Trust a demon to tell you the truth and yet in a way that you don't want it.

vs 13

Is Jesus here marking out a pattern we should follow, with a sort of ranked system of leadership? Or is he just doing something that made his ministry more powerful? I suppose the middle ground is to learn from its benefits and use it as hermeneutically responsibly as possible. I've seen some pretty long bows drawn from the calling of disciples.

vs 14

Twelve is obviously an important number, there being twelve tribes of Israel.

vs 15

Two jobs, pretty simple, really. They preach, and they drive out demons. What really interests me is that Jesus puts these two together - the word, and the miraculous back up. Now, a lot of us would say that this model is dead, but some would say it's not. I've yet to see miracles used in this way in the church, so I'm open-minded.

vs 16-19

It's an all-star line up of fishermen, a zealot, a tax collector, and a traitor (and some others whose backgrounds I don't know off the top of my head). What could go wrong? But that's the whole point - partly, that God can work through anyone, and when he does you're far more likely to go, "Wow, God," than, "Hey, awesome speaker." But also, Jesus has built in rebellion and alternative opinion. As to why, it's not really that easy to say. You could say it is for fulfilling prophecy, and you'd be at least partly correct. Was it to show grace too? Was it to have another point of view that he could correct? We don't really know, all we can know is what happens and is recorded.

vs 20

How crowded must the place be that you can't eat? Is there a person between your hand and your mouth? Big party.

vs 21

Like most parents who go to a big party to save their child say.

vs 22

Wow, everyone is crashing this party.

vs 23

Hopefully the person who is between his hand and his mouth has moved at this point. It's a good point, though. How exactly does this hypothesis of the pharisees work? Well, actually, you can make some arguments. It could be a spiritual Ponzi scheme - take some evil spirits, 'drive them out' before you to get people believing, and then just circulate them around into the passers by, and keep the ball rolling, hence leading people astray.

vs 24

But Jesus point is clear - like the eventual end of a Ponzi scheme (it runs out of money and goes broke), a leader who spends his time attacking his own troops eventually might convince people he has changed sides, but also ends up with no army.

vs 25

Reiteration.

vs 26

So even if, worst case scenario, Jesus is working as the prince of demons, he is only proving how defeated he is. Dead man walking, here.

vs 27

So you have to have power over someone to be able to push them around. This is the only other explanation, if it is not a scam.

vs 28

Which is nice.

vs 29

Yes, it's a hard verse, but I like the explanation I've been given, which seems to fit contextually - that these guys had said that Jesus was not using God's power to do his ministry, and as such were speaking directly against God's power, saying God was not God, that the work God was doing was Satan's work. Thinking about it like this, it is actually a little broader than I had first imagined. Whenever someone says, "Oh, that's not a miracle, that person was healed by science," they are denying God's Holy Spirit. Whenever someone says, "God didn't change that person to be a better person, he just needed a religious framework to set his life to," that person is sinning against the Holy Spirit.

The term here, eternal sin, is quite hardcore though. I suppose the way some people want to interpret it is that it's a 'once sinned, always sinned' sin, so that if you do it once, you're damned forever. I mean, that makes absolutely no sense, since Paul is saved. I think you have to read it as 'it is the only sin with eternal consequences' - that is, all other sin can be forgiven, but if you won't accept forgiveness because you refuse to allow that it is the Holy Spirit's power giving it to you, you are sort of boned.

vs 30

Just in case you missed that.

vs 31

Because, you know, it's still so crowded, and the pharisees probably wouldn't get out of the way.

vs 32

Fair enough, right?

vs 33

And you wonder why people thought he was a bit crazy.

vs 34

Still sounding crazy, as these people are obviously not his mother and brothers.

vs 35

But here we have the explanation - Jesus is God's son first. And anyone who does God's will is one of God's adopted children first. It's not that I want to start a cult, but I think the cult of family we have in Australia just totally trumps this truth, and people get sucked in by the "must look after blood relatives at all cost" thing. If you put your family ahead of God's will, you're sinning.

Easy for me to say, I have no kids.

Sermon: John 4:43-54

Long time no see, blog! Yes, law study has left you somewhat dejected and alone, but fear not, the toil of my labour is below - what turned out to be a very difficult sermon on the end of John 4. Enjoy it, Mr and Mrs Blogosphere.

Sermon 3: John 4:43-54

Jesus heals the son of a servant of Herod – not the most popular person around.

On miracles, and what they are for.

Who is Jesus speaking to as 'needing signs and miracles'? “you people”

Do we take Jesus at his word? (Faith in terms of belief, faith in terms of trust, faith in terms of chance)

Sermon 3 words

A lot of people would say that we live in a country without faith, that Australia is a place where people do not have a desire to talk about issues like faith, because they feel faith is not relevant to their lives. But what if we split that idea, faith, up into a few different words that people use more commonly today? One part of faith is taking a risk. We take risks because we can't control everything. This is something people do every day, all the time. Whether it's sitting on a chair you've never seen before that might be broken or rickety without checking it (probably a low risk), to jumping off a cliff into water (which people do all the time at the blowhole in Warriewood), or driving a car while drunk, assuming you won't get caught by police - each one is taking a risk, because it is doing something without having total control over the outcome.

Another part of faith is trust. Trust means taking people at their word, relying on them to do something. There's a lot of talk about Australians being distrustful, especially of politicians. The truth is, every day we take people at their word. Sometimes it is for simple things – someone offers to buy us a coffee when they go to get one, and we give them five dollars assuming they will bring us back a coffee and hopefully some change. Sometimes, we trust people on really important things – someone offers to invest our life savings for us, and we take them at their word. There are many Australians who fall into trust scams, and lose everything. And no matter how many of these scams get found out, more continue to arise, because people are prepared to trust people who sound trustworthy. We trust other people because we can't do everything ourselves.

The other big part of faith is belief. This is the part that many Australians most often turn their nose up at, as if they don't believe anything, as if everyone fully researches and understands everything before they accept it as true. But when people read in the newspaper that 17 people were killed by a bomb blast, do they travel to Libya and count the bodies? When scientists say they need 4.4 billion dollars to build a particle accelerator, most people just nod and believe them, rather than asking for the complete costings, and studying what it actually costs to research, build and fund such a thing, and questioning its pertinence and relevance. They also have to believe the results the scientists tell them. The simple fact is that we need to accept things that other people tell us, because there is too much information in the world for us to absorb it all on our own. We believe things because there are just some things we can't fully know and understand for ourselves.

Today, as we look at this last, small section of John chapter 4, we are looking at a very small part of Jesus' life as recorded by John the Evangelist, and it is all about faith. In fact, it is a very relevant part of his story for us, because it gives us a glimpse at how faith works when it comes to Jesus. It also helps us to come to a deeper understanding of miracles, which can sometimes be confusing to us today. So let's dive into this last part of chapter four and see what we can learn together.

Jesus has left Samaria after spending two days in a town where he was welcomed, his teaching respected, and his authority acknowledged. He now heads back to his own people, to his home town of Galilee. Straightaway, we are caught by something of a paradox in this account. Jesus has commented that a prophet has no honour in their own country. However, we read that when he arrives, the people welcome him, because they remember all the things he had done during passover in the capital, Jerusalem. You might remember that he had cleared the temple courts of marketeers, and he spoke about rebuilding the temple in three days, and he performed many signs. In fact, if we turn quickly to chapter 2, we will gain some insight into why Jesus made the comment that he did. In chapter 2 starting at verse 23, we read, “Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed in his name. 24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people. 25 He did not need human testimony about them, for he knew what was in them.”

Jesus knows these people. He knows all people. He knows what people are like. One minute, they will see the miracles, hear the words of teaching, and believe what he says. But belief alone is not faith. It is only one part of faith. People can change what they believe. Sure, the crowd likes Jesus now, but they will very soon leave him. And we should be wary of that ourselves. How easy is it for you to simply believe in Jesus? When it's what you've always been taught, when it's what you've been securely brought up in and encouraged in at church every week by good bible teachers and strong leadership, how easy is it to just believe in Jesus' name? To accept that Jesus is really the son of God only as fact and not let that truth impact your life? We should be warned by the stunning words of James in his epistle, at chapter 2 verse 19, where he says, “You believe that there is one God? Good! Even the demons believe that – and shudder.” Belief is not enough. Believing there is one God is not enough. Knowing Jesus is the son of God, and that he died for your sin, is not enough! These people had believed in Jesus' name, in his authority, but they weren't going to stick around. There is more to faith than just belief.

So Jesus travels to Cana, and John reminds us that this is the place where he turned the water to wine at a wedding. That really sets the scene for what follows. Jesus is returning to a place where he did a miracle, and it is here that he is going to be asked to do another. You see, a royal official had a sick son in Capernaum. Now, Capernaum was well over ten miles away, and when you can't jump in a car, that's a fair hike, more than a day's walk. But this official has made the trip, because his son is dying, and he has nowhere else to turn. So when he hears that Jesus has arrived in the area again, he starts walking. Remember, this man's son is dying. Does he go out on what could be a wild goose chase to try and hunt down this possible miracle worker? Or does he stay with his son for what could be his last hours alive?

This official takes a risk, and heads out to find this supposed prophet. He takes another risk, too – you see, he is a royal official for Herod, the so-called king of the Jews. Herod was seen basically as a puppet of the Roman regime, and so someone who worked for him was seen as something of a sell-out, a traitor. It was like being a tax collector back in those days, or perhaps going and working for a cigarette company now. Sure, it's a job, but people are not going to think well of you for doing it. This man could not be sure that Jesus would help him, even if he had the power to heal. He might get sent home empty-handed. No wonder when he gets to Jesus, he begs. Thankfully, we know that Jesus does not discriminate against people. Last week, he didn't discriminate against a woman who had been married several times, and then was living with a man outside of marriage. He didn't discriminate against a whole town of Samaritans, who weren't even from the same nation as him, and were considered outsiders, or enemies. He doesn't discriminate against this royal official, and he does not discriminate against anyone today, either. No matter who we are, what we have done, or where we come from, Jesus is willing to deal with us.

But following God is a risk. When you pray for something, you then let it out of your control. Something we really like in the west is control. Control brings security and comfort. This royal official probably had a bit of power and control over life. But when his son was dying, his choices were limited. He chose to take a risk and go to Jesus, rather than to take control, and get the last few hours of his son's life before losing him. Are you prepared to risk your comfort and security, and take the risk of taking God at his word and living the way he expects you to, relying on him instead of yourself? Jesus will accept you, but will you accept him?

Now, Jesus' response to the official is very interesting. The official comes with a need – his son is dying, and he wants help. But Jesus makes a comment – not to the official alone, but to all the people of Galilee, to those people who had believed in Jesus' name in Jerusalem, but who he knew he couldn't trust. He says to them, “Unless you people see signs and wonders, you will never believe.” Now, how would you feel if someone told you that you didn't really believe something you said you did? But that is exactly what Jesus is saying about these people. They had already seen signs. They had already 'believed' in his name back in chapter 2, or so they said. Jesus here is showing the limitations of miracles and wonders in actually convincing people to truly believe, to truly have faith.

You have heard the saying, “I'll believe it when I see it”? These days, the saying is, “Pics or it didn't happen.” Now that so many young people have a camera built into their mobile phone, they demand pictures of everything, displayed on Facebook or emailed around, or else they won't believe that it happened! Many people think they need to see in order to believe. Quite a few people will say, “If Jesus came down and did a miracle in front of me now, I would believe in him.” Does that sound familiar? In Matthew 27:42, the religious leaders said, “Let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him.” They had already seen him perform miracles, but that wasn't good enough. Their unbelief was a mockery against Jesus as he died on the cross. More fool them.

The truth is that many, many people saw Jesus perform miracles, or even were healed themselves, and yet did not come to faith in Jesus as Christ, as Son of God. In Luke 17, ten lepers approach Jesus, all call him Master, and all ask to be healed. Jesus tells them to present themselves to the priest, and when they do all ten are healed. But only one returns to Jesus, to thank him and praise God. I wonder how such people reconciled their healing, or the miracles and signs they'd seen, with not having faith in Christ? The fact of the matter is that Jesus had made claims about his godhood, about his mission from the Father, about coming from heaven, about the kingdom of God. And even though these people had heard what Jesus had to say, even though they had seen it backed up with miracles, backed up with heavenly signs, backed up by the testimony of those healed and of John the Baptist, they did not take Jesus at his word. They did not trust Jesus.

Imagine for a moment you were to take a gospel – any gospel, your favourite, perhaps. Mine happens to be John. So, let's take the book of John, and let's cut out everything Jesus has to say. Let's cut out everything that talks about Jesus. Let's only keep in those bits that are miracles, signs and wonders. For one thing, the book would be a lot shorter. But think – even though you read about Jesus turning water into wine, healings, exorcism of demons from people, feeding of thousands, walking on water – and even the resurrection – without having any of what Jesus says included in the gospel, what use would it be? How would we know anything about why Jesus came, what the signs and wonders signified, what his death and resurrection meant, without his words to tell us? Jesus could come to earth, do all those miracles, die, be raised, and ascend to heaven, with none of us being any the wiser about what it meant. All of Jesus' miraculous actions are meaningless, except as signs pointing to the truth of his message. That's how these people were treating Jesus – ignoring his words, only accepting his miracles. And that is meaningless.

When you think about it like that, Jesus' words take on an even more forceful meaning. “Unless you people see signs and wonders, you will never believe.” For them, Jesus' words, the words of God, were not important. No, they needed signs. Even with those signs, though, they were not convinced. They were not prepared to take a risk, they were just happy to accept whatever signs they saw, but nothing else. If your position is that you can't believe what Jesus says until you see a miraculous sign, I would advise you to think deeply about whether it would make any difference. Are you really just using that as an excuse not to take his words seriously?

Now the official, he had come to Jesus, had taken the risk of failure, the risk of rejection, and so he simply says in verse 49, “Sir, come down before my child dies.” And Jesus' reply to this request is simple. “Go, Jesus replied, “your son will live.” No fancy hand-waving, no miraculous sign, no wondrous portent, not even a taking a single step towards the official's house in Caperneum. Just those simple words, “Go, your son will live.” And we are told that this royal official took Jesus at his word and departed. He didn't walk away sad like the rich young ruler. He didn't walk away confused like Nicodemus. He walks away, having taken Jesus at his word, trusting that Jesus is telling the truth, believing that Jesus has the power to back up his words, without having to see a sign, or witness a miracle. It's out of his hands, so he takes the risk that Jesus is right.

Do you recall Jesus' words to Thomas, who had to see Jesus' crucifixion wounds to believe that he was resurrected from the dead? Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” These words are about those people who believe without being able to see the miracles that took place. People like us. We simply do not get the option of seeing Jesus risen the way the disciples did. We have to believe their testimony, believe John's testimony here in his Gospel. We have to trust God that his message in the Bible is both true and sufficient, that he sent Christ to us to save us from our sin, and we can trust him without seeing it for ourselves. We have to trust Jesus' words that his death is enough to take away our sin. We don't get to see the miraculous sign of the resurrection to prove it to us. When we believe, there is no measurable way we can tell if our sin has been forgiven. We have to take Jesus at his word. Do you trust Christ that his death and resurrection has saved you from sin? Do you take Jesus at his word?

The official trusts Jesus enough to turn around and walk back home. By the next day, he is still travelling, when he meets one of his servants, who had probably come to give him the news, and good news it was! The boy was living, healed of his affliction. A miracle! But when the servant tells him of the hour at which the boy's sickness was gone, the official realises that this was the exact time that Jesus had told him that his son would live. As a consequence, we are told, he and his whole household believed. And so we find, at the end of this small window into one of Jesus' miracles, a complete picture of faith. A man takes a risk by giving up the paltry control he has of his circumstances, and coming to Jesus. Jesus informs him that his son is well, and he takes Jesus at his word. He trusts that what Jesus says is true, that he will deliver on his promise. Finally, he sees his son alive and well, and he believes. And his whole family also believes – having seen the healing of the boy, and heard the testimony of the father. They didn't meet Jesus, didn't hear his words, and he never saw the healing. All they see is the boy healed, and all they hear are the words told them about Jesus by the father.

We've looked at some elements of faith separately, but no doubt you can see how they are interlinked. Trusting someone, believing something – both are taking a risk. Trusting someone can also involve believing something they tell you – accepting both the person's truthfulness and the veracity of the facts they base their words on. Similarly, believing some piece of information usually also involves trusting the source from which it comes. For people today, both believers and non-believers, they face several big questions as they consider what role Jesus might play in their lives. Can they believe that God exists, that there is a spiritual reality to the universe, that there might be life after death, a heaven and a hell? Can they trust the words of those who have written the Bible, what Jesus has to say about God, about sin, about how to live? Can they take the risk of losing control over their own life, and putting that control into the hands of God?

They are difficult questions, because they are questions of faith. They can't be explained, nor their answers discovered, merely with science, or even simply with logic. Such spiritual questions must be answered both with the mind and with the heart. It is not simply a matter of believing something – like the people of Galilee, who believed, or perhaps even knew in their heads that Jesus was sent by God. Faith is both a matter of knowing, or believing, and also trusting, and also doing. To have faith in Jesus is to accept what he says, not just as a fact, but as a truth which changes how you live your life. Coming to faith in Jesus is often a process for people, but it doesn't always follow the pattern in this narrative. Many people will never witness the healing of a loved one, for example. The most compelling miracle most people will see is the impact faith has on someone's everyday life, on your life. If we are to be ambassadors of Christ, we must show people that living the life of faith – of belief, trust, and taking risks – is not just a possibility, it is a real and practical way of life. How can we expect others to take these steps, if we can't show them how we do so in our lives?

Sermon: Materialism +material

Another sermon from quite some time ago (this one is actually dated - April 1 - but it doesn't have the year. However, I remember that it was part of a three part series, the second of which was Easter Sunday, so by using calculation, it was... 2007!). To put it in context, this was part one of a three part series that the church wanted to give on 'giving' - but I personally couldn't stand the idea of giving three sermons in a row on "please give more money to the church" so I gave a series of three sermons on Materialism, Generosity (Easter), and Prosperity.

As a double benefit (or whammy, depending on your attitude) I have also included some notes that I used on this same topic for a youth group presentation. There's actually a Powerpoint that goes with the youth group talk, but since there is no function to add it here, and I don't know that it's worth hosting it on some hosting site for a month, I'll just mention it here. You can always bug me for it if you're keen. And once again, these are posted mainly for the benefit of someone who asked, but are here for everyone to enjoy. So enjoy!

---------------------------------------------------------

Materialism (April 1^st)

The material world isn’t evil - It is OK for Christians to enjoy stuff in the material world

But living for material things is short sighted and wrong - At its worst, it is idolatry and pantheism

Money is the quintessential material good – it can buy you anything material, and nothing immaterial

God gives us some material blessing, so what should we do with it? - Good stewardship

Doesn’t mean being anal about everything – God will challenge you on things as you go

1 Tim 6:17-19 Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.

-----------------------

Today I want to talk about something that is vital to our daily lives. It’s there when you wake up. It’s with you when you’re at work. It’s all around us. It’s here right now. It’s inescapable. It’s all over you. It’s inside you. You’re sitting on it. You eat it. You probably make a living out of it. What is it?

To put it most simply, it’s stuff. Some people call it “matter”, or the “material world”. Christians might even call it “creation”. You know what I mean, ‘that stuff we interact with every day, that we live in, on, around or with’, that’s the stuff I’m talking about.

Why do I want to talk about stuff? Well, it seems like a pretty important thing to talk about, fundamental as it is to our every day lives. And because it is so much a part of our lives, we need to have a right attitude about it, because our attitude towards stuff will then feed into how we treat stuff and what we expect of stuff. That is, it will affect how we live our daily lives.

Because stuff is all around us, everyone has an attitude towards it. And how people think about the world they live in is important to know, especially if we’re wanting to impact those people with the gospel. So I want to look at the three big overarching beliefs that people have when it comes to stuff. They are: Stuff is Neutral, Stuff is Evil, Stuff Doesn’t Exist.

So let’s start from the end. Stuff Doesn’t Exist. The basic idea of this belief is that stuff, all that stuff that you interact with in various ways in your everyday life, isn’t really stuff. It isn’t really anything at all! It doesn’t exist. It isn’t real. Now you might say to me, “You’re kidding, Ben. No one believes that. I mean, I’m sitting right here on a chair made of stuff, what sort of boffin is going to tell me that it doesn’t really exist?” The answer is, all sorts of people!

Hindus, for example, believe that all the stuff you see, and touch and feel and taste, is all an illusion. They believe that this reality that we live in, which they call maya, is like when you walk into a dark room, and you see a piece of rope, but you think it’s a snake. When you look at it in the dark, you see a snake, and you think it’s really real. But when you turn the light on, you realise it’s just a piece of rope, and you feel like a bit of an idiot. Hindus think that the whole world is like that snake – you’re looking at something, but you can’t really see what it is. What you think it is is just an illusion. It’s actually something else, some actual spiritual reality that is beyond physical stuff.

Buddhists are very similar. Some Buddhists believe the same thing about maya. Others actually believe that the stuff around us really doesn’t exist at all. Instead of it being an illusion that tricks your senses, they believe that we’re actually living in something like a dream. So instead of seeing a rope in a dark room and thinking it’s a snake, the chair you’re sitting on just plain doesn’t exist at all! It doesn’t exist any more than something you dream comes true when you wake up.

Apparently Christian Science teaches that the world is an “error”, and that reality is in fact entirely spiritual. Christian Science acknowledges that we all seem to be experiencing a material existence, but holds that this experience ultimately gives way to a true spiritual understanding of God.

And then you’ve got Solipsists, or Skeptics. They’re a bunch of philosophers with too much time on their hands that believe in what’s called philosophical skepticism. They basically believe that you can't prove that anything really exists outside your brain, so there. You can see why they’re called skeptics!

Hopefully you see what I mean when I say that what you think about stuff affects how you live. If you didn’t really believe that any of this stuff was actually real, how would that affect your attitude towards it? You might think that they would just go around smashing it, or treating it with no respect, because after all, it isn’t real! Well, philosophical skeptics might. But most hindus and Buddhists and Christian Scientists don’t. How do you think they spend most of their time? There are usually two reactions. One is that they spend their lives trying to ignore the stuff around them, trying to look past it and find the real truth that is behind the fake stuff that doesn’t really exist. So they end up ignoring the real world looking for enlightenment. The other reaction says well, since it doesn’t matter anyway, let's revel in it, and they live as greedily and as richly as they possibly can, because after all, it doesn’t matter! What ends up happening is that they can live in a big rich mansion overlooking pitiful poor slums and not care at all, or even feel guilty. After all, those people aren't really poor – they just have an illusion of poverty! Which also means you don't need to help them – you're probably helping them recognise the illusion this way.

Does that sound Christian? Do you think that all the stuff around is not really there? Do you think we should just ignore it, in the hope of seeking a higher truth? The Bible doesn’t seem to think so. It says, in Genesis chapter 1 verse 1, that “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”. Does that sound like it’s an illusion? Or does that sound like God actually made something? When God created man and woman, he really did make them. He made bodies for them that really exist. Jesus came in a real body, he was really walking around, he was really persecuted physically, and he was physically killed. And that physical death was important – by his wounds we are healed.

So as Christians, we can strike one of our three options out. The world really does exist. Stuff really exists. Our bodies really exist. God really created them, they aren't an illusion.

What's next? Next we have the idea that stuff is actually bad. Evil. That chair you're sitting on is evil! Well, perhaps it is. Not everyone who believes this option thinks that all things are evil by their very nature – they might only believe that some stuff is created evil, and other stuff is created good. Most usually, though, the division is made between created stuff (which is what we are talking about today) and spiritual stuff. So most people who believe that stuff is evil will tell you that it's only this material stuff – money, cars, chairs, our human bodies – that is evil, but that spiritual stuff – our souls, and angels, and spiritual stuff – is good. Material stuff, bad. Spiritual stuff, good. Philosophically, that's called dualism. Dual mean 'two', so it's a belief basically in two creations: the evil matter one, and the good spiritual one. Gnosticism, the religious movement that came out of early Christian heresies, believes this. One Gnostic actually believed that the God of the Old Testament was different from the God in the New Testament! He said that the old God of Israel who created the world was evil, and so he killed people, and judged them and was all nasty. But the God of the New Testament, Jesus, is the Good God, who created heaven and salvation and gives us souls and the Holy Spirit and all that good stuff.

Some Zoroastrians have a very similar view of the world – that there was a creator God who created all the good stuff, but that evil stuff was also there at the beginning, and even some Muslim beliefs hold that Allah created evil things like Djinni, or demons.

How do people who believe this act? How does this attitude affect their actions? What do you think? Well, for one, you'd expect them to reject anything that they thought was evil, wouldn't you? So no material possessions – no car, no house, perhaps the barest clothes, certainly no collecting of wealth! That's all evil. That's what you'd expect, anyway. And some people who believe this are like that – even in Paul's time, there were people like this, and we read about them in 1 Timothy chapter 4, verse 3: “They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.”

Interestingly, though, they don't all act like that! Peter, when describing these heretics in 2 Peter, says this in chapter 2 verse 1: “They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up.” and then later in verse 13: “Their idea of pleasure is to carouse in broad daylight. They are blots and blemishes, revelling in their pleasures while they feast with you. With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed—an accursed brood!” So even though they say that they believe that material stuff is evil and that you should have nothing to do with it, they in fact hoard it for themselves, and are adulterous and greedy! Probably they think that, if only their souls are holy and their material bodies are evil, then they may as well use their bodies for evil purposes anyway, because only their souls will go to heaven.

Finally, some people who believe this just become totally fatalistic. Since they believe that their god created both good and evil, then that god must be capricious – which means whimsical or erratic, like you'll never know what they're going to do next. A lot of Muslims believe that Allah is like that – he might do good things, he might do evil things, because he's powerful and erratic. And they just say “Allah wills it” and accept it as part of Allah's nature.

Does any of that sound Christian? At first it sounds a little attractive – after all, we have seen how temptations of riches and sex and power corrupt people, and turn them away from God. It's almost plausible! But do you believe that God created evil stuff, or that perhaps God created some stuff, which was good, and someone else created the Evil stuff? Or perhaps God created all the good stuff, and the evil stuff was just hanging around? I think John put it well when he said in John chapter 1 verse 3: “Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.” God made everything. There's no evil thing that created evil stuff. There's no pre-existent evil stuff that existed before God created the good stuff.

So if stuff exists, but isn't evil, what's our final option, that stuff is neutral? By neutral I mean that it has no moral value. Stuff isn't right, stuff isn't wrong, it's just stuff. So a chair is neither good nor evil, nor is a tree, or a mountain, or a fountain pen. Spiders aren't evil, snakes aren't evil. Puppy dogs and cute kittens aren't good. At least stuff actually exists. But it holds no moral value one way or the other. Philosophically, this view is called neutral monism. It's the idea that only one thing really exists (matter) and that everything is made out of the same thing, when you get right down to it. Because everything is made out of the same stuff, it can't be good or evil. Rather, it's only really good or evil depending on how you use it. Eastern religions tend to call it something like a 'balance', like yin-yang in taoism. Sure, things can be different, they say, but everything balances out. You might think something is good or evil, but really it will all balance out, so it's ok. Scientifically, we'd call it, well, science. Science states that all stuff is just neutral and can be studied as such, and it's only people that put moral values onto things, and that's pretty fake.

And, probably because of science, this view tends to be the one that permeates our society, and all Western societies. So guns don't kill people, people kill people. Food isn't good, it's just a thing. If you eat too much of it, it will be evil, and if you use it as part of a balanced diet, it will be good. A car isn't good or evil – if you fill it with explosives and attack Americans with it, it's evil, and if you drive sick people to hospital with it, it's good. So really, it's not stuff that is good or bad, but it is people who make it good or evil, either by saying it's good or evil, or using it in a good or evil way.

How does this attitude, that stuff is neutral, neither good or evil, affect people's lives? If you want to know, look around. If stuff is neutral, then it means that we as humans make it good or evil. But we suck at that. How does it generally work? If we like it, it must be good. If we don't like it, it must be evil. So sunsets, puppies, good food, clean air, money – all these things are good. They make us feel good, so we value those and try to protect them and make lots of them. But spiders, disease, war, homework and pain, they are all evil. We try and get rid of those. If stuff has no value other than what humans put on it, then we give it an arbitrary value. It's this belief, when taken to its logical conclusion, that tells us it's ok to kill unborn children, or old people, or disabled people, and then farm their organs out so that we can be healthy. Peter Singer, an Australian philosopher, reckons that children up to 4 weeks old aren't real people, so it would be ok to kill them off. Why? Because he decided that you're only really a human if you've got consciousness, and apparently his measuring of consciousness means that newborn babies aren't human.

Is this what Christians believe? Do we believe that God made the world, and left us to decide whether the things in it are good or evil? Maybe some of us do. Like I said, certainly a lot of people in western countries like Australia would believe that. But is that how the Bible puts it? Let's read some and see.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good. And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And God saw that it was good. And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night. And God saw that it was good. And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." And God saw that it was good. And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.

God created a good world. And not just good in that it’s nice, or pretty or pleasing or a happy fun place to live. Sometimes, it’s all those things. In Genesis 1, God describes his creation as “good” six times, and “very good” once. By good, he means “pleasing”. So God is pleased with his creation. It’s good because God is good. And when we say that God is good, we don’t mean he’s nice, or pretty or happy and fun. We mean he’s correct. Just. Loving. Righteous. In the right. We don't define God by what is good. We define good by what God is! Nothing God does is ever wrong, or evil. And that includes creation. God is good, and all his works are just. And so his creation is good. It’s not just neutral, it’s not just what we make of it. God made something of it first. He made it good. So stuff, no matter what it is, is not by its nature evil. By its nature, it is good and given by God.

Now obviously, this belief is not without its difficulties. I mean can we really believe this? Is everything, all the stuff around us, really morally good? Are nuclear warheads morally good? Spiders? Cancer? Hard for us to call these things good, isn't it? It really makes us look at what we mean when we say “good”. Like I said, we don't define God by what is good, we define good by what God is. Let me put it another way. Stuff is good, just so far as it conforms to the will of God. God's goodness comes first, it is primary. All other goodness comes from God.

So, we’ve seen how these other beliefs shape people’s attitudes and their actions. What about this one? If stuff is actually morally good, then how should we be living our lives according to stuff?

Well, firstly, we have to realise that it’s good! Paul says in Romans 14:14 “I know and am convinced in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself”. Nothing! No food, no act, no piece of stuff is by its nature unclean, that is, profane, unholy, against God. 1 Timothy 4:4 says “For everything God created is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, because it is consecrated by the word of God and prayer.”

In fact, let’s keep reading 1 Timothy, because Paul seems to have a lot to say on this subject, and I think he sums up a Christian attitude to material stuff very succinctly. Paul is talking about money, and when you’re talking about stuff, money is about the best example to use – because money is basically liquid stuff. You can buy just about any stuff with money. So what does Paul say?

1 Timothy 6:17-19 “Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. Command them to do good, to be rich in good deeds, and to be generous and willing to share. In this way they will lay up treasure for themselves as a firm foundation for the coming age, so that they may take hold of the life that is truly life.”

First thing Paul says, is that we shouldn’t be arrogant, or put our hope in wealth. Being arrogant means presuming that you’re more important than you are. Easy to do if you’ve got a bit of money. But hope in a great wealth of stuff is really no hope at all. At the least, it’s short sighted, because while stuff might be good, it isn’t eternal. Apparently, we can’t take our material wealth with us when we die, and for all the things you can buy with money, salvation isn’t one of them. If you take such a vain hope to its logical conclusion, you get idolatry! You end up putting all your trust in money to save you, putting money before God, and that is idolatry. And this isn’t just something that non-Christians can suffer from. 1 Timothy isn’t written to non-Christians, it’s written to Timothy, so that he can give these instructions to the church! So we have to take heed, and not put our hope in wealth. But that’s our own sinful nature that causes this problem of idolatry. The wealth itself is not evil.

Paul says instead that God richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment! Sometimes you can get to thinking that Christianity is a subsistence, hand-to-mouth religion, where God gives us just enough to get by, as if he’s some miser who has to count his coins every day, and that anything he gives us beyond absolute necessity we should give away. But that’s not true at all. God gives us stuff, and we are allowed to enjoy it! Now sure, we’ve got to be responsible. We’ve got to stick within the boundaries, make sure that it conforms to the will of God. But that doesn’t mean that having fun is against the rules. God is not a big dour school principal, and Christians aren’t killjoys. We are actually allowed to enjoy the things God has given us.

Paul continues, though. He says that we should “do good, be rich in good deeds, and be generous and willing to share.” There is nothing wrong with enjoying the good things that God has given you. But that’s not the whole Christian story when it comes to stuff. If that’s all we did, how would we be different from all the other people, who hoard wealth for themselves and revel in it? How would we be different from the rich Hindus who build their mansions overlooking the slums, and have no conscience about it? We are given things to enjoy, but we are also called to do good, to count our wealth not in material possessions that God has given us for enjoyment, but in the good deeds we can do for God. Paul said we should be rich in good deeds. The wealth that God has given us to enjoy, we should share, and be generous with, so that other people can enjoy it too.

So when God gives us wealth, what are we to do with it? We are to use it to do good, be rich in good deeds, and be generous and share it. To some people, that might sound irresponsible. They might say “What about stewardship? What about being wise stewards of what God has given us to look after?” Well, stewardship is important. But I think we get mixed up with what we might think is wisdom – good investment strategies, insurances, and stuff like that – and godly wisdom, which says quite simply “The most worthwhile investment is one that will pay eternal dividends”. Nothing wrong with insurance. Nothing wrong with investments. But will these things serve God's purposes? God doesn't need us to invest prudently to improve his equity. He already owns everything! And since we won't be taking this material wealth with us, what should we be doing with it? Paul says that if we share it, and are generous with it, and do good deeds, that is how we will lay up treasure for ourselves as a firm foundation for the coming age. Because life, real, true life, doesn't end when we leave this planet. This is just the beginning. The coming age is heaven, and I guarantee you that we'll spend a whole lot more time there than we will here.

So don't presume that the stuff you've got is going to get you anywhere. Stuff doesn't even have the ability to make you really truly happy, let alone to save you from your sin and put you back into relationship with God! Only God can do that. So put your hope in him. It's the same God who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. So let's enjoy it! And let's also do good, lets invest in good deeds, and let's be generous and let's share. Good stewardship, that is, looking after God's stuff with his godly wisdom instead of our earthly wisdom, that's the best way to invest our stuff. That's going to have an eternal payoff. And not only that, but it will help us to keep on track. It will help us to live the real good life. The life that starts now, and goes into eternity forever.

Let's pray:

Our heavenly Father, we thank you for the world that you made through your Word and Spirit and authority. We thank you that you have made a world that really exist, that you don't trick us with illusions. We thank you that you have not made an evil world which we have to deny or fight against. We thank you that you did not make a neutral world, and leave it to us to shape it. Father, you made a good world, a righteous world, just as you are righteous. And with those things of this world, the good stuff you have given us, the good money and wealth you have provided to us, help us to have a godly and righteous attitude towards them. Help us to use them in a way that conforms to your good and righteous will. Thank you that we can enjoy them. Thank you that we can share them. Help us to use them also to do good deeds, and to be generous. Thank you that through this transitory, material stuff, we can build relationships and help others, and so build up a treasure in heaven. Help us to treat your world as your good world. Separate us from those other, wrong beliefs about stuff, and help us to answer those who have these wrong beliefs. We ask it by the authority of Jesus, for whom and through whom all stuff was created, AMEN

--------------------------------------

Stuff: The Good, The Bad, Or The Unexistent?

Tonight we are going to look at stuff, and how we as Christians should think about stuff. First of all, though, what is stuff? When we talk about stuff in church, the first thing we often think about is clouds and winds, trees and plants, mountains, rocks, snow, beaches, oceans – basically everything in the world. And when we're talking about all the stuff in the world, we have a Christian-y word for it. What's that word?

Creation. We talk about God creating everything in the world, and the world itself. But something that I think we don't often think about when we're talking about creation is all the other stuff in the world. God created wind, but who created wind turbines? God created trees and plants, but who created houses and apartments? God created snow, but who created snow machines? And God created the sea, but who created the yachts to sail on it? I mean, if we're going to talk about stuff, surely all this stuff is included, right? Do technological devices get included in God's creation? What do you think?

I think God's creation does include all the stuff that is man-made, as we call it. This is important, too, because we are surrounded by stuff in our lives, aren't we? You got here by the use of stuff. Your rooms are cluttered with stuff, perhaps some of you literally. In fact, you're sitting on stuff right now, you're wearing stuff, and later we'll eat stuff. With this in mind, there are two questions I want us to look at tonight about stuff, and how God wants us to think about stuff, and live with stuff he's given us. The first is, very broadly, what should our attitude be to stuff? That is, how do we think about the stuff that God has made? This is an important question, because how we think about things impacts on how we act towards them, doesn't it? So we need to think about stuff, and what we believe about stuff, and see how that impacts how we live with stuff and treat stuff.

So, there are three attitudes that most of the world between them have towards stuff. They are that stuff is neutral, that stuff is evil, or that stuff does not even exist.

Now, I know you're probably scratching your heads a bit and thinking, “Who would believe that stuff doesn't exist?” So let's look at that one first. There are people in the world who believe that the material world, that is the world of stuff, is an illusion. That is, that it's a trick. It doesn't really exist at all. But they do. Hindus and Buddhists both believe that the physical world is an illusion, that they call maya. They think that all physical things are a trick which distracts us from the true reality, which is spiritual enlightenment. So tell me, if nothing in the whole world actually exists, how would that impact how you live your life?

Basically, there are two ways that this view affects your life. On the one hand, you can be like Buddha, and devote your life to ignoring the physical world and its distractions, and try and seek enlightenment so that you can reach nirvana, or a oneness with the spiritual reality, and leave the illusion of the physical world behind. The other reaction says well, since it doesn’t matter anyway, let's revel in it, and they live as greedily and as richly as they possibly can, because after all, it doesn’t matter! What ends up happening is that they can live in a big rich mansion overlooking pitiful poor slums and not care at all, or even feel guilty. After all, those people aren't really poor – they just have an illusion of poverty! Which also means you don't need to help them – you're probably helping them recognise the illusion this way.

What's next? Next we have the idea that stuff is actually bad. Evil. That chair you're sitting on is evil! Well, perhaps it is. Not everyone who believes this option thinks that all things are evil by their very nature – they might only believe that some stuff is created evil, and other stuff is created good. Most usually, though, the division is made between created stuff (which is what we are talking about today) and spiritual stuff. So most people who believe that stuff is evil will tell you that it's only this material stuff – money, cars, chairs, our human bodies – that is evil, but that spiritual stuff – our souls, and angels, and spiritual stuff – is good. Material stuff, bad. Spiritual stuff, good. Philosophically, that's called dualism. Dual mean 'two', so it's a belief basically in two creations: the evil matter one, and the good spiritual one. Gnosticism, the religious movement that came out of early Christian heresies, believes this. One Gnostic actually believed that the God of the Old Testament was different from the God in the New Testament! He said that the old God of Israel who created the world was evil, and so he killed people, and judged them and was all nasty. But the God of the New Testament, Jesus, is the Good God, who created heaven and salvation and gives us souls and the Holy Spirit and all that good stuff. Some Muslim beliefs hold that Allah created evil things like Djinni, or demons, specifically to be evil.

If this is what you believed, how do you think it would impact your life and how you lived? The three big things it usually does are one of these. Firstly, you might turn your back on all material goods, and shun them, because they are evil. So no material possessions – no car, no house, perhaps the barest clothes, certainly no collecting of wealth! That's all evil. That's what you'd expect, anyway. And some people who believe this are like that. The second one is a little trickier. They believe that because the material part of them is the evil part, and the spiritual part is the good part, that they can do whatever they want with their physical bodies, because they are evil and temporary, whereas their spirit is eternal and good. So even though they say that they believe that material stuff is evil and that you should have nothing to do with it, they in fact hoard it for themselves, and are adulterous and greedy! Finally, some people who believe this just become totally fatalistic. Since they believe that their god created both good and evil, then that god must be capricious – which means whimsical or erratic, like you'll never know what they're going to do next. A lot of Muslims believe that Allah is like that – he might do good things, he might do evil things, because he's powerful and erratic. And they just say “Allah wills it” and accept it as part of Allah's nature.

Finally, we come to the idea that stuff is neutral. That is, that it has no moral value. So it exists, but it's not evil. It's not good either. It's the idea that only one thing really exists (matter) and that everything is made out of the same thing, when you get right down to it. Because everything is made out of the same stuff, it can't be good or evil. Rather, it's only really good or evil depending on how you use it. Eastern religions tend to call it something like a 'balance', like yin-yang in taoism. Sure, things can be different, they say, but everything balances out. You might think something is good or evil, but really it will all balance out, so it's ok. Scientifically, we'd call it, well, science. Science states that all stuff is just neutral and can be studied as such, and it's only people that put moral values onto things, and that's pretty fake.

How does this idea that stuff is just neutral, neither good or bad, affect how you live your life? Well, if there's no such thing as good or bad, except for what we put into our stuff when we use it, then you'd expect people to try and use their stuff to do good, and not to do bad, right? But when humans are deciding what's good and what's evil, what happens? We end up saying, “Good is what I like, and evil is what I don't like.” When we can say what's good and what's evil, good and evil become worthless. Think about the conclusion of this. If we are all created, if we are stuff, then are we good, or bad? We're neither, we're nothing. So can I just kill someone if I think it's for a good cause? They're just atoms, after all.

So what do Christians believe? Is stuff really just an illusion trying to distract us from the spiritual reality? Why not? (Gen 1:1). Is stuff evil, and trying to corrupt our pure souls, so that we should shun it and not touch it? Is stuff neutral, so that it doesn't matter what it is, we can only define good or evil by how we use stuff?

Well, let me read to you a bit from the Bible. No doubt you've probably heard it before.

God created a good world. And not just good in that it’s nice, or pretty or pleasing or a happy fun place to live. Sometimes, it’s all those things. In Genesis 1, God describes his creation as “good” six times, and “very good” once. By good, he means “pleasing”. So God is pleased with his creation. It’s good because God is good. And when we say that God is good, we don’t mean he’s nice, or pretty or happy and fun. We mean he’s correct. Just. Loving. Righteous. In the right. We don't define God by what is good. We define good by what God is! Nothing God does is ever wrong, or evil. And that includes creation. God is good, and all his works are just. And so his creation is good. It’s not just neutral, it’s not just what we make of it. God made something of it first. He made it good. So stuff, no matter what it is, is not by its nature evil. By its nature, it is good and given by God.

How does this belief shape our actions towards our stuff? Well, the book of 1 Timothy actually has a fair bit to say about this. So I want to to look at these, and have a think about them, and discuss what you think God is saying here about how our lives should be shaped by the fact that he has made a good creation.

Now, before we move on to what we're doing tonight, I want to talk about what we'll be doing on our last night in two weeks' time. Because we are looking at stuff, and how Christians should think and act with physical possessions, I am looking at us having an eBay night on our last night of term. What does that mean? It means that over the next two weeks, you should all be looking around at all the stuff you yourselves own, and pick something that you know you can live without. Bring it, and we will take photos of it and write up a sales pitch for it, and then we will sell everything on eBay, and donate the money to those in need.