Gordon Cheng / 30th September 2004
“Is Lord!”, we might respond. Is blasphemy one of the (many) sins we've put in the too hard basket, and decided not to tackle when it comes to our non-christian friends? I was impressed by this letter in Melbourne's Age newspaper, by someone who had taken the trouble to stick his hand up and complain...
What Dermott Brereton says in his private life is his business—but I must take exception to the inclusion of the Lord's name in his comment about Lions footballer Jonathan Brown (Sport, 28/9). I found it insensitive and disrespectful. I know such a view may seem old-fashioned in today's secular world, but there are still many of us who hold Jesus Christ in the highest esteem.
Nick Hansen, South Croydon
Ian Carmichael / 29th September 2004
Recently, the extremely short and often overlooked 3rd letter of John produced a challenge for me.
Commending Gaius for his hospitality for itinerant Gospel workers, John says:
You will do well to send them on their journey in a manner worthy of God. For they have gone out for the sake of the name, accepting nothing from the Gentiles. Therefore we ought to support people like these, that we may be fellow workers for the truth. (verses 7-8)
People leaving home to proclaim Christ ought to be supported by Christians. And to what standard? Nothing less than in a “manner worthy of God”.
And why? So that we can have the privilege of being fellow workers with them in making "the name" known thoughout the world.
Perhaps, by sharing in this missionary work, those who are converted as a result will also be our “crown in which we will glory in the presence of our Lord Jesus when he comes” (1 Thess 2:19).
Emma Thornett / 28th September 2004
We received an email recently from a lady who is involved in Bible translation work in PNG. She writes:
Following some months of chronological foundational Bible teaching, just this week we presented the gospel for the first time to the Gende people in their own language using scriptures we have translated for them in their own language. A few have understood and believed clearly. Praise God.
Praise God indeed!
Gordon Cheng / 27th September 2004
/ The ones they wouldn't publish!
I keep writing. They keep rejecting...
Dear editor,
In the acrimonious debate over what the Bible may or may not teach about women, it seems that many are of the view that it is demeaning to adopt a subordinate role. This is unfortunate and wrong. Jesus was a servant to us, and gave his life for our forgiveness. In consequence we think more highly of him, rather than less. That women and men carry different roles in no way reflects on their status before God.
Yours sincerely,
Gordon Cheng.
Tony Payne / 26th September 2004
I recently had the pleasure of sitting in on a preaching workshop with David Jackman from the London-based Cornhill Training Course. David made some telling points from a survey of apostolic preaching from Acts 17-20, and one in particular struck me.
As Paul preaches the gospel in Thessalonica, Berea, Corinth and Ephesus his method is quite consistent: he proclaims, reasons, explains, proves, persuades, and teaches that Jesus is the Christ. In the synagogues, from house to house, and in the lecture halls, he persistently argues for the truth of the gospel in a rational and persuasive way.
By contrast, the powerful opposition to the gospel in these chapters is not rational at all. Paul's opponents do not counter his presentation with reasonable, persuasive arguments of their own—quite the opposite. The opposition is abusive, irrational and violent. They stir up crowds to the point of riot; they make false accusations; they throw Paul out of the synagogues.
On the one side you have rationality, argument, persuasion; on the other, prejudice, blinkered animosity, violence.
I think I have often made the mistake of regarding those who oppose the gospel as the ‘rationalists’; the cool-headed philosophers who want to demolish Christianity with their rapier wit and devastating arguments. But as I think back over my experience—in personal conversation and in public debate—the number of thought-through, rational, persuasive objections to the gospel have been minuscule. On most occasions, it is prejudice, wilful misunderstanding, distortions, personal attack, lies and abusiveness. Certainly, the coverage that the gospel (and evangelical Christianity) receives in the mainstream media is most often of this nature.
We must not be surprised when we encounter this sort of reaction to the gospel. And neither should we be tempted to change our methodology. Like Paul, let us not shrink from proclaiming, teaching, reasoning, persuading, arguing, proving and testifying about repentance towards God, and faith in the crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ.
