When You Understand…

When you understand that Venezuela has the largest oil reserves in the world. And this means that they have enough oil to upturn the entire world economy, making oil cheaper than most of us have experienced in this century, and in doing so they would unseat many powerful oil barons and stakeholders from their perch. When you understand that Russia has enough oil, gas, and other resources to potentially supply to Europe to help remake it into an industrial powerhouse, and Russia into a country as wealthy as any oil sheikh country, making both Europe and Russia richer and more powerful than the US. When you understand that Iran has enough oil to supply the entire Middle East and compete with OPEC, unsettling regional power structures. When you understand that Gaza has enough natural gas and other reserves just off its coast to make Gaza into a wealthy little country, and that many elites just can't ever abide this happening.

And when you understand that if all this were to happen, that the United States and its oil and resource partners would be displaced from their position as dominating the whole world. Or at least that they would be forced to compete on a far more even footing. Making the world economy far less US, OPEC, and Israeli dominant.

When you understand this, then you realize that what we see happening across the world makes far more sense than the old "we must fight for democracy" or "we must defend the only democracy in the Middle East" or "this was foretold to happen when the fig tree blossomed" nonsense. These are all lies designed to get people to cheer on what are effectively just imperial strategies of dominance.

Immoral government acts exactly like Mafia. Not similar to it, exactly like it. It uses a combination of corruption, bribes, addiction to services (in the foreign affairs context, foreign aid) lies and force to achieve its goals.

- It might use force because bribes failed.

- It might use force because it just wants to remind people it can.

- It might use force just because it can, and it is just easy for it to do so.

But it acts like Mafia in seeking to dominate and increase its territory.

Note: I said immoral government acts this way. This is an important distinction. 

Legitimate government retains force for the good of its own people, to enact justice and defend the nation. It is a servant that exists for the good of the nation, its people, and seeks to use force against other nations only in the strictest terms of self-defence; like defending their own borders, resources and population.

Immoral government will stretch the definition of self-defence to mean anything it wants to justify.

Immoral government has fallen for the devil's temptation that he offered Jesus: "to rule over many nations."

What we see happening fits far better into this framework than the false narratives people are fed, to make them feel like theft of other nations resources is justified.

This does not make Iran or Russian leadership good guys. That's not my point, especially in the case of Iran. My point is an immoral globalist elite is using US, Israeli, and other international and globalist forces to maintain its power over as much of the world that it can. And this is evil. And it bears evil fruit as a result.

And this explains what we are seeing better than those other frameworks. It is also contemptible and this sort of behaviour always results in the collapse of the society engaging in it.

 

Reasons People Give For Divorce

 

When it comes to addressing divorce in our society one of the things you need to do is cut through the nonsense. People give many different reasons for divorce. But most of these just amount to justifications to do what they already wanted to do. That is why I address this in a coming book I am working on.

Here is part of what I have written about:

Why People Get Divorced (Matt. 19:3-9)

Jesus gives one legitimate reason for divorce and remarriage, but he also gives the real cause of divorce as well,

“3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce and to send her away?” 8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.”

Why does Jesus say people get divorced? Hardness of hearts. But what are the reasons that modern people give for divorce and how does what Jesus say align with this? It is valuable for us to consider this, because what Jesus does is drive a nail through the heart of many arguments for divorce.

So, what reasons do people give for getting divorced?[1]

Infidelity and adultery

This is the number one reason for divorce. It might seem strange to distinguish between infidelity and adultery. But sometimes people divorce because their spouse had sex with someone else. Sometimes it is because they had affection for someone else and this ruins the marriage creating lack of affection and love. And sometimes it is because the person has become consumed by pornography or other deviances. But when we examine the reasons people give for cheating, we see something interesting. The justifications given for cheating are anger and resentment or lack of connection, which leads to contempt. In other words, hardness of hearts.

Trouble with finances

People often say that money issues lead to their divorce. They cannot agree on how to spend, or set financial goals and go their own financial ways. So, they become resentful of each other and contempt takes root. In other words, hardness of hearts.

Lack of communication

Not being able to effectively communicate what you are thinking, how you feel, what your boundaries are, is another reason people give for divorce. When communication has broken down for long enough people start to get really over this. This breeds contempt in the relationship, and it comes to an end. In other words, again, hardness of hearts.

Constant arguing

Some say their divorce happened because they are not being heard and have to keep arguing over the same things. This is just another version of the previous reason. But instead of not communicating, the couple have become clanging gongs in each other’s ears, which leads to the same result. This makes them resentful and hateful of their wife or husband. In other words, hardness of hearts.

Physical and Emotional Abuse

Marriage dot com says this contributes to 23.5% of marriages. However, considering that bringing this up can make the divorce settlement more favourable for a lot of women, this number should be viewed sceptically.[2] That being said, it still is a major reason that people give for divorce, and we live in a world today where the definition of domestic violence has been great expanded. So, it is likely to be a growing reason, at least in the short term.

When we think of an abusive spouse we tend to think of a violent or abusive man. But while it is more likely for men to use violence, women can be violent too. Between 1989 and 2012 men made up one quarter of partner deaths.[3] Usually the man kills the woman. But this still means that in 25% of cases men were the victims. That is a massive number, one that many people are probably not aware of.   

Whatever the exact circumstances in each situation, though, we can say for certain that domestic abuse comes about as a result of hardness of hearts. We will come back to this later in this book.

Lack of Intimacy

This can mean both physical or emotional intimacy, and does not always mean just sex, but that is often part of the issue. Couples whose intimacy dries up turn against each other. They become resentful and begin to look at each other with contempt. “Ignoring your partner’s sexual needs is being called the number one cause of divorce in recent times.”[4] You know who ignores your partners need for sex? Someone with a hard heart. So, again Jesus called it.

Other popular reasons people give for divorce are unrealistic expectations, lack of sharing the marriage duties, lack of being prepared, and one partner gaining weight. But if you look into all the reasons why people say this led to their divorce, you will see that they allowed small hurts to become resentment, and then they allowed this resentment to become contempt, and this caused their hearts to become hard.

So, we can see that Jesus, as usual, is absolutely on the money. Why do people get divorced? Because of hardness of hearts, “8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.” Jesus agrees with Moses who brings up hatred as the cause of divorce, and Malachi who says this, “16 For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless” (Mal. 2:16). In Hebrew the word used here is literally hate. In fact, if you are reading the NKJV it says “hate”.

Hatred, which is another word for hardness of heart, is why people get divorced. There are few fates worse than looking over at your wife or husband in the morning and seeing a contemptible person. Whether the fault is with you, or both of you. And some people find themselves in this situation, in fact, it happens all to often. And, once contempt is in the equation the marriage is almost certainly doomed. 

Now, I know some translations say here that God hates divorce. The KJV says this, “16 For the Lord, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away:…” This makes it sound like God is saying he hates divorce. This is so because the way it is written in Hebrew allows for either translation.

That Malachi is challenging men who hate their wives and divorce them fits better with what Moses says, and what Jesus says about Moses. But some prefer the KJV reading, and consider it basic to understanding the topic of divorce. Either way you translate it the context still shows that God is condemning men who hate their wives,

“14 But you say, “Why does he not?” Because the Lord was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 15 Did he not make them one, with a portion of the Spirit in their union? And what was the one God seeking? Godly offspring. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and let none of you be faithless to the wife of your youth. 16 “For the man who does not love his wife but divorces her, says the Lord, the God of Israel, covers his garment with violence, says the Lord of hosts. So guard yourselves in your spirit, and do not be faithless” (Mal. 2:14-16).

The Bible is consistent in tying divorce to hatred, or hardness of hearts. Which is the same thing, really.

This means that we should do all that we can to cultivate a soft heart towards our spouses in marriage. Whatever the reasons people give for divorce, what is really happening is that people are latching onto a variety of reasons to harden their hearts.

List of References

---

[1] https://www.marriage.com/advice/divorce/10-most-common-reasons-for-divorce/

[2] Women making false accusations to get favourable divorce settlements is a well known phenomenon.

[3] https://familylaw.aylwardgame.com.au/men-are-often-the-victims-of-domestic-violence-says-bettina-arndt/

[4] Bid.

Did John Calvin Teach The Perpetual Virginity of Mary?

 

One of the strangest arguments for the perpetual virginity of Mary is the claim that because she said, "I know no man" this means she had vowed to never lay with a man. Some even claim that John Calvin argued this. In fact, I myself was led astray by these claims to think he had, after only quickly examining them. I first encountered the claim that Calvin taught the perpetual virginity of Mary through this meme, shared by a Catholic friend:

 

Then I did some quick googling, which affirmed the meme was right, and that also noted that he based his position on the words “I knew no man.” But I decided to do a bit more reading, and I am glad I did, because it turns out that Calvin was taken out of context here. Here is what he actually wrote in his commentary on the issue:

“The conjecture which some have drawn from these words, that she had  formed a vow of perpetual virginity, is unfounded and altogether  absurd. She would, in that case, have committed treachery by allowing   herself to be united to a husband, and would have poured contempt on the holy covenant of marriage; which could not have been done without mockery of God. Although the Papists have exercised barbarous tyranny on this subject, yet they have never proceeded so far as to allow the   wife to form a vow of continence at her own pleasure. Besides, it is an   idle and unfounded supposition that a monastic life existed among the Jews.   

 We must reply, however, to another objection, that the virgin refers to the future, and so declares that she will have no intercourse with a man. The probable and simple explanation is, that the greatness or rather majesty of the subject made so powerful an impression on the virgin, that all her senses were bound and locked up in astonishment. When she is informed that the Son of God will be born, she imagines   something unusual, and for that reason leaves conjugal intercourse out   of view. Hence she breaks out in amazement, How shall this be? And so God graciously forgives her, and replies kindly and gently by the angel, because, in a devout and serious manner, and with admiration of a divine work, she had inquired how that would be, which, she was convinced, went beyond the common and ordinary course of nature. In a   word, this question was not so contrary to faith, because it arose   rather from admiration than from distrust.”[1]

Ok, so Calvin made no such claim, even though some have quoted him as such. Let me give my response to the argument that “I knew no man” is a claim of a perpetual vow of virginity.

First, all Mary said is that she had never lain with a man, so how could she be pregnant? That is not a vow. It is the rational statement of shock from a virgin, finding out she is pregnant. Just as Calvin notes.

But even if it was a vow, women's vows were always conditional on acceptance of her husband,

"6 If she marries a husband, while under her vows or any thoughtless utterance of her lips by which she has bound herself, 7 and her husband hears of it and says nothing to her on the day that he hears, then her vows shall stand, and her pledges by which she has bound herself shall stand. 8 But if, on the day that her husband comes to hear of it, he opposes her, then he makes void her vow that was on her, and the thoughtless utterance of her lips by which she bound herself. And the Lord will forgive her" (Numbers 30).

Joseph wanted a wife, and only intended to refrain from sex until Jesus was born. Calvin notes that she would have been committing treachery if she had married knowing she had made this vow. But this is incorrect, because as a righteous woman of Judah, Mary knew that her husband could remove the vow. And the fact that he wanted a wife is a good indication that he would have.

I get why Catholics say Mary was a perpetual virgin. It is to defend the miracle of Jesus' immaculate conception. The fact that a woman who had never lain with a man her entire life became a mother is clearly an incredible miracle. But so is a woman who had never laid with a man until after she had her first child. That is the exact same miracle. It is just as miraculous in every way. Both situations require divine intervention.

But a woman who never lays with her husband is not a wife. And Joseph wanted a wife and clearly intended to lay with his wife. Joseph is called a Just and Righteous man, he would know that some of his own ancient kinsmen were judged for refusing to consummate marriage (Judah's sons in Gen. 38).

Neither the vow is a roadblock, nor is the perpetual virginity necessary. These are just examples of how the Christian Church has the same tendency as the Rabbis to add hedges around Scripture that are unnecessary.

But on a practical level I wonder, how many Catholic marriages have been made hell for a man, because Christian women in history thought a woman who never laid with her husband was the greatest woman ever? I know of some famous examples from medieval times. But how common is this? How common has this been in history? From a theoretical perspective this argument might seem inconsequential, both Catholics and Protestants affirm the virgin birth of Jesus Christ. But from a practical standpoint, what effect has the idea of perpetual virginity had on actual marriages between Catholic men and women?

Going beyond Scripture has flow on consequences.

Now, of course many Catholic couples have been very fruitful in this area. Catholics are well known, and rightfully so, for having many children and shunning contraception. I am more convinced every day that Catholics are right about the wrongness of contraception. At least chemical versions, as they all cause abortion. But making such a model of a woman the ideal model, when Scripture does not require it, will also have had negative impacts on a lot of marriages.

Something to think about.

List of References

---

[1] Calvin, John. Calvin's Complete Bible Commentaries (With Active Table of Contents in Biblical Order) (Kindle Locations 362842-362843).  . Kindle Edition.

The Purpose of Christmas

You can watch the video of this sermon here at 8PM AEST on YouTube

Introduction

Today I want us to again think intentionally about Christmas. I want to preface this message this morning with a disclaimer that the start of this message may seem to be anti-Christmas. But this is not my aim, I am a big fan of Christmas, and the more I have meditated on the Christ-centric message of Christmas, the more I enjoy it as I get older. The coming of Jesus as a small child upturned the Spiritual realm and signalled to the devil that his defeat was near. Also, getting together with family, and friends, celebrating, blessing each other with gifts, are also all wonderful things. So, my aim is not to bash Christmas, but to remind you again what the real purpose of Christmas is, or at least was originally. So, here’s what I am going to do in this message. I am going to give you a brief history of winter celebrations from well before Christianity, then I am going to talk about how Christmas came about and why it came about, and then I am going to show how this applies to us today, and how we should think come Christmas time.  

One of the tendencies of Christians is that we can become too insular, too inward thinking, and forget our true purpose in this world is to make disciples. Jesus designed his church to light the way to him, to show people the way of salvation, and what this looks like. God leaves us here because he wants us to bring glimpses of his kingdom justice into this world, to be his witnesses, and to work through us in creative ways to bring people to salvation. Christmas is part of this glorious tradition of mission. So, let’s look at the origins of Christmas and then we shall see how we can apply this knowledge this year, to be more missionally minded.

But first, let’s read our guiding passage this morning: Paul says in 1 Corinthians 9:19-23,

“19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.”

Just keep this passage in mind as we begin with a brief look at the history of Christmas.

A Brief History of Christmas

We often like to say that the first Christmas was when the magi found Jesus and worshipped him. I think this is legitimate, because they did gather to worship the Lord and celebrate his birth (though he was likely around two by this time). This is what Christmas means: gathering to worship Jesus. But Christmas didn’t become an official Christian celebration or holiday until about the fourth century AD. It was celebrated before this, but not officially. In fact, the gospel of Mark, often considered the first gospel written, does not even mention the birth of Christ, though the other three do. Can you guess the major festival Christians did celebrate? (Easter).

This isn’t surprising as Jesus’ death and resurrection are at the centre of our faith. Indeed, the Easter celebration for Christians replaced the Passover, and the early Christians referred to the celebration as Pascha, which means Passover in Greek, because Jesus is the true Passover lamb.

Every Sunday was considered resurrection Sunday. This is why Christians began to gather (mass) on Sunday rather than the Sabbath.

So where does Christmas originate?

Winter Solstice

For as long as we know into pre-history and history the various pagan peoples of Europe celebrated the winter solstice. This is the shortest day of the year. ‘Solstice’ means ‘the sun stands still’.

The reason people were so keen to party at this time of year is, 1) They were celebrating the fact that the ‘sun was returning to full strength’. The days would get longer, and it would get warmer. 2) In Northern Europe this time of year is very bleak, crops don’t grow, you’ve slaughtered your meat for winter, so drinking, feasting, and partying was a way to slog through the shortest, darkest days of the year (if you have been to Europe in Winter you will know what I mean).

In Scandinavia one tradition at this time of year was to take a massive log, usually a cut down tree, and from the Winter Solstice (Around December 21^st) they would burn it, they would feast and party until it was fully burnt. It usually took 12 days to completely burn up. Hence the idea of the 12 days of Christmas and the yule log.

People would decorate their homes, and even bring inside trees and plants to make them look nicer in the bleak winter. In Germany, people honoured the pagan God Odin (the father of Thor), who was said to fly about the sky at night during the Winter Solstice and observe his people’s behaviour. He had white hair, and a long white beard. He knew when you were sleeping, he knew when you were awake. He knew if you’d been good or bad…He was even said to put toys into children’s stockings, left by the chimneys.  

Yule, or Yuletide, or the Winter Solstice stretches back in history as far as we know these Northern European peoples existed.  

Saturnalia

Further south, where it is warmer and the sun more prominent in winter, the Romans celebrated Saturnalia, which was the celebration of the Birth of the unconquerable Sun God Mithra. It finished on the 25^th of December. This festival included drinking, singing door to door merry songs, sometimes naked, eating human-shaped biscuits, and the servants would become masters for the period of the festival, among other things.

Mithra was barely known in the Roman world until the second century. It is likely Mithraism was pushed to compete with Christianity. And the Mithraism that Romans practiced was very different to the ancient Persian version. 

So where does Christmas come in?

Christmas begins

Our first known mention of a Christmas feast is in 360 AD in the city of Rome. It became an official Christian holiday later in the fourth century. It was instituted by Pope Julius 1, who established the date of the 25^th of December, which is the most ancient date associated with Jesus’ birth. So why did they start celebrating Christmas at the same time of year as this pagan holiday? Well, for one, this was the most ancient date associated with the birth of Jesus. But also because the church wanted to engage in discipleship.  

Remember Jesus said that we are to make disciples of all nations, Matthew 28:19-20, “19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” This is what the fourth century Church was seeking to do, it was seeking to make disciples of all the peoples in the Roman Empire. In fact, they were seeking to teach two groups about Jesus thought Christmas:

Firstly, at about this time there were many heretics in the church who did not believe Jesus was really a flesh and blood human being, as well as God. What better way to teach these errant Christians that Jesus was fully human and divine, than celebrating his miraculous birth?

Many passages make this twin nature of Jesus very clear. Here is a good one, “16 I, Jesus, have sent my angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the descendant of David, the bright morning star” (Rev. 22:16). How can Jesus be both the root, or the source of David and his descendant? Because he is God and man.

Martin Luther says on the divine and human nature of Christ,

“You may now perceive why it is imperative to believe and confess the divinity of Christ. To overcome the sin of a whole world, and death, and the wrath of God was no work for any creature. The power of sin and death could be broken only by a greater power. God alone could abolish sin, destroy death, and take away the curse of the Law. God alone could bring righteousness, life, and mercy to light. In attributing these achievements to Christ the Scriptures pronounce Christ to be God forever. The article of justification is indeed fundamental. If we remain sound in this one article, we remain sound in all the other articles of the Christian faith. When we teach justification by faith in Christ we confess at the same time that Christ is God.”[1]

So, one of the purposes of Christmas was to teach Christians proper belief about Jesus. Now very few, if any Christians, don’t know Jesus was God and man, and Christmas helped establish this truth in peoples lives. Every year we celebrate God becoming a man, born of a virgin, in a small human village.   

But Christmas also aided in bringing ancient pagans into the church. As we know the ancient Romans liked to party, they loved their holidays, and instead of asking them to give up everything they loved, the early church took their holidays and rebranded them.  

Instead of celebrating the Sun God, they were taught to worship the true Son of God. Instead of singing pagan songs, they taught the pagans to sing Christian ones. It actually took some time for the behaviour of the pagans to change, but eventually the Christmas celebrations became all about Jesus, and what he commanded. By medieval times Paganism was virtually gone from much of Europe, though some of it was incorporated into the practices of what would become the Roman Catholic Church.

As Christianity spread out over Europe, and encountered the various Germanic peoples, which includes all the peoples we think of as English, French, German, Dutch, Austrian, Scandinavian, Norwegian, etc, they encountered their Winter celebrations, and again brought them into the church, and gave them new meaning and significance.  

The Germanic peoples loved to decorate their homes with foliage in winter, hence the origins of the Christmas tree and Christmas wreaths. We now decorate it with Christian symbols. Their Germanic ideas of Odin were replaced with Saint Nicholas of Myra, the generous, kind-hearted Christian bishop, who defended the weak, and according to legend wasn’t afraid to punch heretics. This began the seeds of the modern Santa Claus.

It needs to be stressed that Santa is not an anagram for Satan, like some Christians claim. It simply means Saint in various European languages. In English Santa Claus is simply Saint Nicholas, or Old Saint Nick.

It must also be stressed that Saint Nicholas was a person who honoured God in word and deed. He looked after the poor and oppressed, and he was a staunch defender of Orthodox Christianity. He was also highly respected among the church. He represented orthodox Christian belief, which Christmas does as well.

Old Saint Nick would be horrified to find out that he had replaced Jesus as the central figure of Christmas. In fact, there is an ancient legend that he slapped the heretic, Arius, once at the council of Nicaea because he did not believe the man was giving Jesus his rightful respect and honour. It is said they threw him in jail over that. Whether the legend is true or not, St Nick would not be happy to know that for many people he has replaced Jesus.  

So kids, remember this, the real Santa Claus worshipped Jesus.

These ancient Christians kept the feasting, the drinking, the gift giving, and all the other celebratory functions, but taught the pagans about Jesus, the saviour who was born of a virgin, who came to achieve their salvation from their false gods, to believe in the true God.

In other words, the early church was seeking to obey Jesus in making disciples of the nations, and they were following Paul’s example of being all things to all people in order that we may save some. 1 Corinthians 9:19-23,

“19 For though I am free from all, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win more of them. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law (though not being myself under the law) that I might win those under the law. 21 To those outside the law I became as one outside the law (not being outside the law of God but under the law of Christ) that I might win those outside the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. 23 I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.”

Christmas is an example of the early church seeking to be all things to all people in order to save some. It is an example of the church thinking creatively about how to make disciples, thinking about how it could bring more people into the church, and therefore more people to faith in Jesus.

The true purpose of Christmas was to make disciples, and it was very effective in doing this.

World’s Culture vs Jesus Christ’s Culture

But sadly, Christmas today has become again more of a pagan holiday for many people, than a Christian one. Over the last 80 years or so the progressive de-Christification of Christmas has been happening at a consistent rate.

Starting with heaps of Christmas carols which turned the focus away from Jesus towards the rituals and outwards shells of Christmas (white snow, silverbells, reindeer, Rudolph and Santa, presents and more). Followed by movie, after movie, that has de-emphasized the Christian elements of Christmas more and more. Combined with marketing that hammers on about Santa Claus and buying expensive gifts. It’s very obvious what is happening.

We are living in a time where paganism is seeking to reclaim Christmas again for itself. Babylon is reasserting itself. Now why is this important?

Because as Christians we know for certain that at the centre of paganism is this important fact: it can only offer people bondage. Paganism is designed to turn us away from the creator towards created things.

Romans 1:21-23 says this,

“21 For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.”

In other word’s Paul says societal decline happens, because people became focused on “things” instead of the creator of those things. It’s not a coincidence that as Christ is removed more from Christmas, that it becomes more about things, and more about spending, spending, spending, which traps people in a materialistic cycle of debt.

By subversive Christmas carols, and Christmas movies that direct people to things rather than Jesus Christ, Christmas has become one of the main drivers of pushing people to something Jesus wanted to save them from: the love of things. It is an inversion, and a sad irony.

Please don’t misunderstand me, I am not saying we can’t like these secular carols, or watch those movies. Some of them are genuinely beautiful songs, and some of the movies are wonderful family fun. I am simply saying don’t make them the main thing at Christmas. Make sure you don’t fall under their spell and forget what Christmas is really about, and don’t be afraid to reassert the true meaning of “Christ’s mass.”  

The message of modern secular Christmas is indebt yourself to impress with gifts. The message of the real Christmas is that Jesus offers us a “free gift” (Rom. 6:23) that pays off our debts, the debts we owed God. Could you get a more wicked inversion than the one in which we now live? Gifts, songs, carolling, parties, drinking and all of this are wonderful things, but let us never forget that all good gifts come from God above, let us make sure we submit everything we do at this time of the year under that perspective.

I think we make a difference in this regard by being like the wise men who came to worship Jesus. No one told them they had to gather to worship Jesus. No one told them they had to bring gifts and bring offerings to Jesus. They just did this out of the overflow of their heart, that wanted to celebrate the coming of the king of kings. I want to be like those guys, and when we are like that we can transform this world for those around us.

The corrupt religion system of our world is very clever at getting us to not only participate in it, but celebrate it, and perpetuate it. The more pagan our culture becomes, the more in bondage people are going to get. The less things like Christmas will be a celebration and the more they will become a burden on people, and the more people will begin to start looking for true hope, a hope beyond possessions.

If we are intentional about making Christmas about Jesus first and foremost, rather than the message of the world, the more we remove ourselves from Babylon’s ways, the more we will stand out from our culture and be an attractive light to those who want freedom from the world’s ways.

This was one of the reasons why Christmas was so powerful in the first place, because it was centred around the message of the free gift of salvation in Jesus Christ. There’s nothing wrong with giving and getting gifts and singing about reindeer and snow at Christmas (as silly as that is for us Aussies, but ‘Let it Snow’ is one of my favourite secular carols for one reason: it’s the song at the beginning and end of Diehard) but the fact that this has become the main thing for many people is what is wrong.

Also consider the absolute irony and tragedy of going into debt for Christmas presents when Christmas is supposed to be about celebrating the free gift of salvation Jesus offers us. Talk about wicked irony there, right?    

Think Missionally This Year

My encouragement to you this Christmas, is to think first, not about gifts, nor about feasts, though all these things are good things. Think first this Christmas about how you can teach people about Jesus, whether your family, your friends, your neighbours, or your work colleagues. Think Missionally this year about how you can teach people about Jesus through what you say and what you do, in word and in deed. Invite them church over Christmas, to Christmas Eve service, and let’s show them a bunch of people who have a hope better than any material gift could ever give us.  

Invite people to a Christmas carol event at your church. If they don’t want to come to church, maybe at the family lunch read from the story of Jesus’ birth in Matthew or Luke. Be creative in bringing back Christian tradition into your celebrations. Maybe you can buy people a gift that points them to Jesus.

Also seek to show that Christmas is not about things for you, but about hope in Christ. So many people focus on what they do, or do not get at Christmas. Be that different person who cares more about presence, than presents.

Look out for those in your life who are lonely and include them in your family events. If you are lonely find someone else who you can celebrate with.

Look for creative ways to engage people this year, to teach them about Jesus, and model to them the freedom that Jesus offers us, freedom from the world’s way of doing things.

The true purpose of Christmas is gospel mission, let’s do that this year. If we want to truly celebrate Christmas as it was intended we must seek to worship Jesus for who he is and what he has done, and also teach others about him, especially the unsaved. Jesus came to die, and rise again, and in doing so achieved our salvation. Peace and goodwill to all men, comes through trusting in him. Tell people about Jesus this year. Let’s pray.

---

[1] Luther, Martin. Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians (p. 83). Kindle Edition.

Reasons for Divorce

 

This is an excerpt from a new book I am working on. Some might find this controversial, some might find it freeing, other might just need more time to wrestle with it, but this is important for people to engage with, because this is biblical and it is a reality many people face in their lives:

Reasons for Divorce (v.9)

What reasons do people give for divorce? We grew apart. She let herself go. We had different dreams. He wanted me to be his mum and maid. She nagged too much. Life just got on top of us, etc, etc. But we see Jesus gives us one reason, and most people misread it. Jesus said, “9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” Most people read this and say that the only reason Jesus gives for divorce is adultery. But he does not say that, he explicitly says, “sexual immorality…” Or sexual sin. This is much broader than adultery. Adultery, as Jesus points out here, is to have sex with another man’s wife or another woman’s husband.

Sexual sin covers a host of other sexual sins, like pornography, homosexuality, fornication and more. We don’t need to go over them all now. So, we can say, that, according to Jesus sexual sin is the legitimate reason for divorce. But what is divorce, and why does this sin allow for it?

This might seem like a no-brainer to ask “what is divorce?” But you will see as we go along, it is actually vital to drill down on this, because there is a big difference between legitimate divorce and illegitimate divorce. The Greek word Jesus uses for divorce in Matthew 19 is “apoluo”. You are probably thinking. Big deal, why are getting into the Greek?

Well, here is why. This is exact same word Jesus uses in the parable of the unmerciful servant when Jesus explains what forgiveness looks like, Matthew. 18:27, “And out of pity for him, the master of that servant released him and forgave him the debt.” The word for released here is “apoluo”, the exact same word. The servant was released from all obligation of the debt. But what is even more mind blowing is that Jesus uses the same word in Luke 6:37, “37 Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;…” That’s what blew my mind. The same word Jesus uses for divorce he uses twice to refer to forgiveness.

Wait what??? How is this even possible?

Well, what happens when you truly forgive someone? You release them from the debt or any obligation. You let it go, let it go…now some of you are going to sing that song all day, right…What happens when you legitimately divorce someone? You set them free, you cut them loose. You are from that moment on no longer obligated to them, biblically speaking, because you have cut the bond. This is at the core of what divorce means, it means setting free of all obligations.

In a legitimate divorce, the marriage has been annulled. Spiritually speaking. It is as if it no longer existed. You are now a single person again. The reason sexual sin allows for this is because when you commit sexual sin you break this spiritual bond. You sunder something spiritually. Because you unite with the other person. This is why the person who is legitimately divorced, and I stress legitimately divorced, in Jesus’ eyes, can remarry. Because they are free of all the obligations to their previous annulled marriage.

This is why the legitimately divorced, and again I stress legitimately divorced, man who remarries only has one wife, not two. The other marriage, ACCORDING TO JESUS, is annulled, terminated. The same is true for the woman who legitimately remarries.

The meaning of the word divorce is literally “cut free” or “set loose”. That is what it means. Make sure you do not get confused even though the word Jesus uses for ‘divorce’ can also mean ‘forgiveness’, divorce is not forgiveness.  So, if you are legitimately divorced in God’s eyes no one can hold it against you. Sexually immorality breaks the bond and you are free to then divorce and move on. Some Christians really arc up at this, but this is precisely what Jesus says right here.

This is also why Joseph could be called a righteous and just man, even though he intended to divorce Mary, “And her husband Joseph, being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame, resolved to divorce her quietly” (Matt. 1:19). In Joseph’s eyes Mary had obviously committed sexual immorality, which he was about to find out it was wrong. But the verse emphasizes his reasons for wanting divorce were just.

But the logical application of this is that if you are not divorced legitimately, then you are not free. You have sinned, “9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery.” This is the other side of the teaching upsets a lot of other Christians, because we can think of heaps of reasons for divorce. But Jesus gave only one. And he only gives it in Matthew, this is not mentioned in Mark or Luke.

This is why the disciples, as I said, are shocked, “10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry.” 11 But he said to them, “Not everyone can receive this saying, but only those to whom it is given.” The disciples obviously could think of lots of other reasons to divorce and remarry as well. This has been a problem throughout all human history. But the truth is Jesus does not affirm this challenges the disciples and the Jews listening by pointing out that many divorced people are not legitimately divorced and therefore are not legitimately remarried. That’s what Jesus is saying. That is what the church has long taught as well. In fact, some Christians believe it is wrong to remarry anyway, even though Jesus gives a limited reason for when they can.

Now, I hear some of you thinking, but doesn’t Paul give another reason for divorce in 1 Corinthians 7. Let’s read what he says there,

“12 To the rest I say (I, not the Lord) that if any brother has a wife who is an unbeliever, and she consents to live with him, he should not divorce her. 13 If any woman has a husband who is an unbeliever, and he consents to live with her, she should not divorce him. 14 For the unbelieving husband is made holy because of his wife, and the unbelieving wife is made holy because of her husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. 15 But if the unbelieving partner separates, let it be so. In such cases the brother or sister is not enslaved. God has called you to peace. 16 For how do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?” (1 Cor. 7:12-16).

Paul says that if you are married to an unbeliever and they want to go, let them, you are not enslaved. What is the opposite of enslaved? Free. In other words, he says this cannot be held against you. Some think that he is adding another exception here to the only one that Jesus gave. But I don’t think he is adding to Jesus’ exception, because when someone moves on they usually move on with someone else. You could say Paul is giving a pastoral application of what Jesus’ says. Though some people think he has expanded the reasons for divorce to include abandonment.

Someone else might be thinking, Matt haven’t you taught in the past that ongoing denial of sex from the husband or wife is reason for divorce? Yes, I have and I still do. This might be more controversial, but remember Jesus said it was for sexual immorality that you could divorce and remarry, and denying your spouse in an ongoing and unrepentant way is both cruel and is also a sexual sin,

“3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control” (1 Cor. 7:3-5).

Paul says, “5 Do not deprive one another…” unless you both agree. And one person suggesting it and the other being made to agree is not what he means. Sex is both a privilege and a responsibility in marriage. “Do not deprive” is a command, unless both want to have a break, or you have a medical reason why you cannot. But that is why we say the vows, for better or worse. Because sometimes life throws hardships at us, that even effect this area of life for married couples. However, in general married men and women should make themselves available to their spouse, otherwise you are actually sinning.

I am not the first person to teach this, this teaching is found throughout church history. There are records throughout medieval Europe of marriages being annulled for this reason. And even Martin Luther said this was a reason for divorce in extreme situations. And I agree.

Now, I know this brings up a whole host of other thoughts, so we will come back to this, but for now, we are just demonstrating that denying your spouse sex is a sexual immorality. And Jesus says that sexual immorality is the only legitimate reason for divorce.

Some people don’t like this, but I think that is because they misread what Jesus says. A sexless marriage can be one of the cruellest prisons for many men and women. It is as much unfaithfulness as adultery itself.

 

We Are On Our Own Now

 

The real reason the US is going to war with Venezuela is simple, it's global power is ending, really it has ended, and now it is returning to the Monroe Doctrine, of dominating it's region. Because that is the only real effective reach it still has. If it even still has that.

-        Hamas outlasted US intervention.

-        Yemen outlasted US intervention.

-        Russia outlasted US intervention.

-        Afghanistan outlasted US intervention.

-        China is successful resisting US intervention.  

Etc, etc.

The ability for the united states to project its power around the world and actually effect change is declining. It is even possible their power will fail in South America. But not before they try to use it.

Look, I should note that I have no problem with the US military taking out drug boats. The military's job is supposed to be making borders secure. Returning to that honourable role is just and good. Borders should be patrolled by effective soldiers stopping people coming across. For too long western nations have abandoned this basic use of the military, preferring to send our soldiers far away for reasons of imperial extension. That is clearly now changing.

But we should also note that Venezuela has oil, rare earth minerals, and it is weak enough that the US thinks it can take it or at least force it to bow to its will. So, that is what it is trying. Effectively it is doing to Venezuela what Russia did to Ukraine, except with less actual justification. But it is basically doing the same thing: a dominant power is seeking to dictate to a much less powerful country.

I suspect there is also a recognition in the Trump administration that if the US is going to remain a dominant power in its region, it needs to turn its attention there. What appears to be happening in the US is that different elites with different visions over how the United States should project its power are in a political clash, and currently the faction that believes they should turn their attention to their own region is dominant. I think this faction will become more dominant over time as the reality of the United States relative weakness in the world becomes more evident.

But the lesson for us here in Australia is this: we are now on our own. Britain has no effective power, and the US's power is shrinking back to the Americas. They may still seek to exert influence from time to time outside their own region, but this will diminish over time as the new multipolar world becomes more entrenched. We are, therefore, now on our own. This will become more clear in coming years.

I say the only path to prosperity and peace for Australia is repentance and faith in God from the Prime Minister down. Others say the way forward is through a complicated series of alliances with countries that oppose China and counterbalance her power. If we go that second route, we guarantee that we will lose our sovereignty in this country. Because we will lose such a battle.

Australia got proud. We were lucky and squandered it. Prepare for a whole different world now guys.

 

Transgender Insurance Bonus

 

The thing which will eventually put an end to liberal democracy quicker than anything else in western nations, is when a significant amount of ordinary people become so sick of subsidizing nonsense, that they refuse to vote for anyone except the parliamentarians who are going to just say no; no to feminism, no to welfare programs, no to DEI, no to minority programs and much more. Of course, this might also happen simply because western societies collapse under the weight of all their social programs and personal debt, but that is just an extension of the same problem.

This is a key example of something that which will just tick off the ordinary person, because it shows that they really are just taking the piss[1] now,

“Aussie drivers can save hundreds on their car insurance by declaring their gender as non-binary.

A male driver called into Radio 2GB in Sydney on Monday to explain that they discovered a lucrative loophole in the insurance system.

The listener, a man named Ben, told Ben Fordham his car insurance quote dropped by $800 when he ticked a gender-neutral box when applying for comprehensive coverage.

“I found the box on there and thought I’m just going to give it a tick and see what it comes out with, it might be a bit of a joke,” he said.

“A joke is right, I was absolutely stunned with what I found … I’d like to see the evidence behind it.”

Fordham said “I can’t believe it”.

“The best deal goes to the non-binary driver … just tick the non-binary box, because no-one is going to be able to disprove how you are identify, you’re going to get a better deal.”

We put it to the test, getting three quotes from NRMA insurance for a middle-aged Sydney driver behind the wheel of an electric Kia EV3, and found the price varied significantly.

Changing only the driver’s stated gender, we found the male driver was quoted $2236 per year, the female driver $2061, and the non-binary driver $1955.”[2]

This is just another insulting and degrading mockery of our whole way of life. Giving an insurance bonus to people who are confused about their gender, or simply unwilling to tick a box. It is just another insult piled on top of a host of ongoing insults, that seek to place standard roles for men and women at the bottom of the rung of society.

The West became more and more open because of the idea of liberalism, and the accompanying concept that most decent people will seek to do what is best, in general, for themselves, those they love and society. Our system was not conceived to hold up to people who cared about none of the principles of decency, honesty, and honour that our nations were founded on. And this is why we see across the world that people are voting more and more for governments which lean to the right. People are sick of being taken advantage of, and we see in many ways how it literally is costing people money to be productive members of society.

We opened up society to a wide variety of perspectives and ways of life, and people abused it. Societies in the future are far less likely to be so open.

List of References

---

[1] This is a blunt Aussie saying meaning, “being taken advantage of.” Forgive the bluntness, but this insurance policy is just wrong.

[2] David McCowen, 2025, https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/motoring-news/nonbinary-drivers-benefit-from-cheaper-car-insurance/news-story/4b41ff7a488d500ac45c2db986b50a3a