the cross - welcome · the person of jesus christ and the work he came to do. we know what god is...

Spring 2006The cross

A U S T R A L I A N F E L L O W S H I P O F E V A N G E L I C A L S T U D E N T S M A G A Z I N E

• The heart of our faith• On preaching the cross• Jesus died...for who?• Why I am not a universalist

and much more!

2 | SALT Spring 2006

Salt Editors: Rebecca Jee and Peter HughesAFES National Director: Richard Chin

AFES National Administrator: Howard SpencerGraphic Design: Codfish Graphics (02) 9874 6560

ISSN 0816–0031

Opinions expressed in this magazine are not necessarily those of AFES. Articles and extracts may be reproduced with permission from the editor. All articles are copyright unless

otherwise stated. Unsolicited articles are welcome, but will not necessarily be published.

Australian Fellowship of Evangelical Students PO Box 684, Kingsford NSW 2032

Ph: 02 9697 0313 Fax: 02 9697 9265Publications: [email protected]

General Enquiries: [email protected] Enquiries: [email protected]

Visit us on the web: www.afes.org.au

Contents

Editorial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The heart of our faith. . .2-3

On preaching the cross . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-5

Jesus died for who? . . . .6-7

Why I am not a universalist . . . . . . . . .8-9

Freedom in foolishness . . . . . . . . .10-11

The cross and bible reading. . . . . . . .12-13

Taking up your cross . . . . . . . . . .14-15

Leon Morris . . . . . . . . . . 16

Busting art myths . . .17-18

Reviews. . . . . . . . . . . .19-22

Contributors . . . . . . . . . . 24

� | SALT Spring 2006

“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God” (1 Cor 1:18). Sadly in the late nineteenth

and early twentieth centuries, this verse seemed almost powerless. The legacy of the Enlightenment which gave rise to the theological liberalism had captured the theological Colleges. Little evangelical scholarship existed, and students who studied theology lacked any support to stand against an overwhelming liberal consensus. The doctrine of Scripture and the doctrine of the Atonement were especially under attack.

But it is in this climate that evangelical university students stood firm under the sovereign gaze of God. The Student Christian Movement (SCM) was the largest Christian body of the day with evangelical roots. But under the influence of theological liberalism, it lost its way. In 1926, the SCM General Secretary (Tissington Tatlow) declared that :

�� the�doctrine�of�the�verbal�inspiration�of�the�bible�is�as�dead�as�Queen�Anne”�(who�was�very�dead�indeed!),�and�that�“no�theologian�worth�the�name�accepts�the�penal�view�of�the�Atonement.�

His view had hardened after the watershed disaffiliation of the Cambridge Inter Collegiate Union (CICCU) from SCM in 1919. Pollock records what transpired:

�� To�settle�the�matter,�a�meeting�of�delegates�from�the�two�committees�met�in�Trinity,�Norman�Grubb�and�D.T.�Dick�representing�the�CICCU�…”After�an�hour’s�conversation�which�got�us�nowhere,”�reported�Grubb,�“one�direct�and�vital�question�was�put:�‘Does�the�SCM�consider�the�atoning�blood�

Editorial • Those who fought to keep the cross central

of�Jesus�Christ�as�the�central�point�of�their�message?’�And�the�answer�given�was,�‘No,�not�as�central,�although�it�is�given�a�place�in�our�teaching.’�That�answer�settled�the�matter,�for�we�explained�to�them�at�once�that�the�atoning�blood�was�so�much�the�heart�of�our�message�that�we�could�never�join�with�a�movement�which�gave�it�lesser�place.”�

The AFES today in many ways is the legacy of this obstreperous CICCU decision in 1919. The atoning blood of Jesus still (and must continue!) to be the heart of our message, for it is the heart of God’s message in the Scriptures.

Over the years we have had undergraduates who have remained similarly obstreperous. But perhaps our most influential voice came from the pen of Leon Morris. Against the tide of academic liberalism in the 50s, his seminal scholarship on the atonement has provided a theological bedrock for evangelicals ever since.

Leon later served as the Principal of Ridley College Melbourne. And Peter Adam (the current principal) remembers learning of the centrality of Christ, and his atoning death under Leon. In July this year, Peter had the privilege of preaching at Leon’s funeral from Romans 3: ‘By grace, by Christ, by blood, and by faith.’. Please join with us in thanking God for this man who fought to keep the cross central, to the glory of God.

In this issue of SALT, we have the privilege of reading Peter Adam’s tribute to Leon Morris (pg 16), and a feast of articles which will enable us to rejoice in the message of the cross as the saving power of God!

Richard ChinAFES National Director1. Pete Lowman, The Day of his Power:�A�history�of�the�

International�Fellowship�of�Evangelical�Students. IVP. Footnote 3 p49.

2. J.C. Pollock, A�Cambridge�Movement (John Murray,

1953), p171.

At the heart of the Christian faith is Jesus Christ and the great salvation he has won for us. Christians are not satisfied with a vague and nebulous notion of God or a utopian vision for the human race. We also reject the reduction of our faith to a set of rules or a pattern of moral behaviour. The Christian faith is much more particular than that.

It is centred on God’s rescue mission, a mission that makes very clear what God is like and what his plans are for us. And that means that at the heart of everything we believe is a particular person and a particular set of events: the person of Jesus Christ and the work he came to do. We know what God is like and we know what God intends for us

because Jesus has come and made this clear.

Jesus himself went to great lengths to make his disciples aware of why he came. ‘The Son of Man did not come to be served’, he told them, ‘but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many’ (Mk 10:45). On the other side of the resurrection he would even use the language of necessity to explain what had happened: ‘The Son of Man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, be crucified and on the third day be raised again’ (Luke 24:7). Jesus himself put his death and resurrection at the centre of his work for us. No wonder the apostle Paul would insist, ‘I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified’ (1 Cor 2:2). In the same letter he outlined what he had received ‘as of first importance’: ‘that Christ died for our sins according

to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter and then to the Twelve’ (1 Cor 15:3–5). On the broadest possible scale, the cross is anticipated at the very beginning of the Bible’s story (Gen 3:15) and is still very much on view at the end when at the centre of the throne stands ‘a lamb, looking as if it had been slain’ (Rev 5:6). A Christianity that is not focussed on the cross has no claim to be the genuine article.

For these reasons as much as any other it is important to get our thinking straight about the death of Jesus. What was it about his death on the cross which makes this single event so central to Christian thinking and living? Why is it simply not enough to speak of Jesus the teacher, Jesus the healer, or Jesus the conqueror without also speaking about Jesus the crucified one, the one who dies for his people? How should we understand what was happening that

The heart of our faith



Friday outside Jerusalem’s city walls and its sequel three days later?

To understand the centrality of the cross of Jesus in all of God’s purposes we need to go back a step. What is it that makes the cross so necessary in the first place? If the Bible does speak of God’s purpose in Jesus as a rescue mission, what do we need to be rescued from? What is the human predicament as God sees it? I suspect that behind much current neglect of the cross and even many of the recent attempts to redefine it, lies considerable confusion about the human condition. Most human diagnoses fail to penetrate beyond the symptoms to the real cause of our problems. Human suffering, our sense of alienation from each other and even from ourselves, oppression, injustice, the fragility of human life on every scale imaginable— all these things are merely symptoms. The biblical diagnosis is that underlying them all is our rebellion against the God who made us and the consequences that such rebellion inevitably brings.

Human sin has three dreadful consequences: guilt, corruption and enslavement. We stand guilty before the Lord of the universe and we know that the wrath of God is coming (Rom 1:18–20; Eph 2:1–3; Col 3:6 etc.). Everything we are and everything we touch has been distorted by our refusal

Some recent challengesGrowing up in an evangelical home, I was surprised at University to find out that my basic understanding of the atonement—that Christ died in my place and for the penalty due my sins—was not shared by everyone. I have since discovered that this view (technically known as the penal substitutionary view of the atonement—penal referring to a penalty, and substitution meaning ‘in the place of’) is a distinguishing feature of evangelical Christianity and the matter of some controversy over the past couple of hundred years, not least in student circles1.

A new round of publications has made this issue a topic of debate yet again. In 2002, for example, former Anglican Archbishop of Perth, Peter Carnley, in his book Reflections�in�Glass2��challenged evangelicals to abandon the doctrine, arguing that it was unknown by the church for its first thousand years3.

In academic theology, the notion of penal substitution is a marginalised viewpoint. In a recent edition of The�Scottish�Journal�of�Theology�Steve Holmes wrote an article reflecting on his recent experience at conference on the topic ‘theologies of the cross’:

…one feature [of the conference] concerned me: in reading the papers, and listening to discussion, it became rather clear that, whilst the various contributors might or might not agree, or even be sure about what they did believe about the cross,

they were all both united and certain on what they didn’t believe in—the traditional Reformed and Evangelical idea of penal substitution4.

(Interestingly, in the article Holmes goes on to write a defence of the doctrine—not because he himself holds it, but because he was alarmed that this important traditional understanding of the atonement was sidelined at a conference purporting to embrace diverse theological views.)

J. I. Packer once wrote of penal substitution as the ‘distinguishing feature of the world-wide evangelical fraternal’. Today, however, it appears that from within evangelicalism some have started to air misgivings. In recent articles, Mark Dever and Robert Doyle both cite number of evangelicals who have spoken against the traditional doctrine. Steve Chalke, for example, has recently written of

The church’s inability to shake off the great distortion of God contained in the theory of penal substitution, with its inbuilt belief in retribution and the

redemptive power of violence, has cost us dearly5.

Why is this doctrine under attack? If the notion that Christ stood in your place and took your penalty never occurred to you to be anything other than a wonderful, life-giving truth, then it might be helpful to hear some of the objections people raise. In his article, Mark Dever helpfully outlines four common objections to the doctrine:

1. Not Enough: This objection states that even if an idea of penal substitutionary atonement is in some sense defensible from the Bible, it is by no means at the centre of the atonement, and should assume its place alongside other theories and models.

2. Irrelevant: This objection claims that even if the Bible teaches this doctrine, such ideas make no sense to modern men and women, and therefore should be abandoned.

3. Individualistic: The objection that the doctrine is too individualistic, reducing the scope of the gospel to me and my sins.

4. Violent: The objection that this theory is violent at its very heart.

What should we say to such objections? Two things I think: Firstly, we should begin by saying that some of these critiques are saying things worth hearing. For example, regarding the first objection, it is true that penal substitution is not the only thing you can say about the atonement. Theologically and biblically, the cross is not only where we see the penalty for our sins dealt with. It is also where we see what love is (1 John 4:10), where the defeat of our enemies takes place (Col 2:14), how the reconciliation of Jew and Gentile is achieved (Eph 2:14-18), what the nature of Christ’s lordship is (Mark 10:45, cf

to recognise him (Mk 7:20–23). What is more, we are not able to extract ourselves from this situation (Rom 6–7). We can still make choices, that is true, but our choices are shaped by our character and our character has been indelibly marked with our own rebellion. The symptoms we experience everyday are related to these three dimensions of the impact of human sin: our guilt, our corruption, and our enslavement.

When the cross is understood against this background, then it becomes clear that, if it is to be a genuine answer to the human predicament, it must deal with all three of these dimensions of sin. The

cross must deal with our guilt before God and the penalty that arises from

it. It must deal with the mess that sin has made of my life. And it must deal with the fact that I am trapped within the spiral of sin, unable to break free of my selfishness in all its forms.

The testimony of Scripture is that all this is

accomplished by the cross.

The penalty we deserve is taken up by God himself in the person of his Son (Gal 3:13; 1 Pet 2:24). Here our understanding of God as Trinity prevents us from pitting the Father against the Son but rather seeing the life and death and resurrection of Jesus as the work of God to save us. What is more, the death of Jesus cleanses us from the corruption that sin

produces in us (1 Jn 1:7). Precisely because of the death, resurrection and ascension of Jesus, the gift of the Spirit is given to those who have been forgiven, producing the fruit of godly living that Paul talks about in Galations 5. Alongside both of these dimensions is the victory that the cross achieves for us. Those who previously enslaved us have been decisively defeated and we have been freed to live as the children of God (Col 2:13–15; Gal 3:26–5:1).

In some circles it has become fashionable to speak about the cross as an example of self-sacrifice, as an act of love, as the triumph of hope and of God’s purposes, without relating it to the problem of our sin and its dire consequences. The New Testament won’t let you get away with that. At the heart of everything that is said about the death of Jesus in the Bible is this idea of penal substitutionary atonement. ‘Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures’ (1 Cor 15:3). Indeed, ‘Christ suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring us to God’ (1 Pet 3:18). ‘God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God’ (2 Cor 5:21). Far from being one possible explanation amongst many, simply one of the theories of the atonement which people have come up with to explain the fact of the atonement, this is the Bible’s own—and therefore God’s own—explanatory key to all other descriptions of what God has done for us in Christ.

Mark Thompson

The cross must deal with our guilt before God and the penalty that arises from it. It must deal with the mess that sin has made of my life. And it must deal with the fact that I am trapped within the spiral of sin, unable to break free of my selfishness in all its forms.

On preaching the cross



15:39), and where the most sacred insight into the nature of the trinity is found (Mark 14:36). Penal substitution is not the only thing we have to say about the cross, and to think that it is would be to impoverish our teaching and understanding of Christ’s work.

The charge of being too individualistic (objection 3) is also worth hearing. If our gospel merely speaks to me and my sins, it says too little. The gospel says something wonderful about my sins, but it says something more wonderful about Jesus and his rule. Indeed, fundamentally, the gospel is about Jesus, not me. It is in the gospel’s declaration of what God is doing in and for Jesus that the problem of me and my sins assumes its proper place.

Our individualism is also challenged when we recall that the cross was God’s means of winning back his bride, the church; that it is God’s peace-treaty between Jew and Gentile; and it is the basis of how we relate in community (Rom 14:15). Individualism is one of the banes of western life and thought, and the cross speaks powerfully against it.

At this point, it is worth saying something about our illustrations for understanding and teaching the atonement. T. C. Hammond, a great defender of the doctrine, once warned of ‘…the careless use of inadequate illustrations by well-meaning but ill-instructed Christians6.’ For example, you may know the illustration of the railway operator who is faced with the dilemma of whether or not to press the button that will allow the train to pass by, having suddenly realised that his son is playing on the track and will be killed in the process. The illustration has a certain emotional impact, but it raises problems in so many areas—the doctrine of God, the doctrine of the Trinity, the person and work of Christ etc—that it, and others like it, are best abandoned.

The objection that the cross is irrelevant (2) has waned in recent years—a post-modern, pluralistic society is much less cavalier about writing off ideas just because they come from a different time, place and culture. The sub-text that we’ve progressed beyond the ideas of ‘primitive’ ethnic groups now smacks of arrogance.

If the question of relevance has waned, the question of violence (4) has swelled into a chorus. Again, in some ways our illustrations may have let us down here.

Anything that conjures up the image—however vaguely—of an angry Father executing a helpless Son needs to be repudiated as unfaithful to the biblical witness.

These criticisms have been made, and our first response has been to listen to them graciously. However, having given them a fair hearing the second thing to say is this: none of these criticism are anything other than what believers in penal substitution themselves have warned about for years. T.C. Hammond, John Stott, J.I. Packer, James Denny and many besides, have all been deeply aware of these dangers and have provided eloquent, careful and sensitive statements of the doctrine that are simply not guilty of the accusations being made. When attacks of the doctrine are aimed at a caricature and show no evidence of serious listening to the best expositions of the doctrine, they are more liable to irritate than to instruct. I, for one, am unaware of anything in the recent criticisms that a careful reading of John Stott, J. I. Packer, James Denny or T. C. Hammond would not have already dealt with.

The emphasis so far has been on what we are not saying about penal substitutionary atonement. We are not saying that it is the only thing we need to say about the cross, nor that it is co-terminus with the gospel, nor that any illustration involving either penalty or substitution is necessarily helpful. What, then, are we saying about the place of this doctrine in our thinking and our practice?

We are saying this: that penal substitutionary atonement, whilst not being the only thing we can say about the cross, is nevertheless the thing we must say about the cross. Peter Jensen puts it this way: It is because evangelicals have

always been conscious of the power and the penalty of sins that their gospel has always majored on the atoning sacrifice of Christ on the cross, through which pardon comes…Whatever else we may and must say about the cross of Christ, for evangelicals the central feature of its effective power lies in the sin-bearing penal substitution of the Saviour 7.

Whatever else we can preach and must preach, we must preach this: that Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, the second person of the Trinity, God incarnate, died on the cross, and that his death (in a way

we don’t pretend to fully comprehend and for which no illustration can do justice) had the character of being both for our sins and in our place.

The challenge has been issued. Let’s respond by proclaiming it well. Let’s preach penal substitutionary atonement well, with intelligence, humility and conviction. And let’s live lives that adorn that message—lives that are communitarian and not individualistic, peaceable and not violent, relevant and not obscure, beautiful and not banal—so that by our proclamation and our living we might bring honour and praise to him who died in our place and for our sins.

Rory Shiner

Further Reading1. Recent�Evangelical�Statements

Robert Doyle, ‘Penal Atonement: The Orthodox Teaching of the Fathers and Three Conversations with John Calvin’ Reformed Theological Review 65 (2006): 34-45. (This is an especially important article for answering Peter Carnley’s charge that the doctrine was not known in the early church.)

Mark Dever, “Too Atonement Centred?” Christianity�Today http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/005/9.29.html

2. Classic�Treatments J. I. Packer’s ‘What Did the Cross

Achieve: The Logic of Penal Substitution’ Tyndale Bulletin 1974.

3. John Stott,�The�Cross�of�Christ�(Downer’s Grove, Ill: IVP, 1986)

Endnotes1. Early last century, a debate over this issue at

Cambridge University eventually lead to the birth of the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students, of which the AFES is a founding member. For the story, see Oliver R. Barclay and Robert M. Horn,�From�Cambridge�to�the�world:�125 years of student witness (Leicester, Inter-Varsity, 2002)

2. Peter Carnley, Reflections in Glass:�Trends�and�Tensions�in�the�Contemporary�Anglican�Church�(Sydney: HarperCollins, 2004)

3. Carnley, Reflections 132.

4. Steve Holmes, ‘Can Punishment Bring Peace: Penal Substitution Revisited’ Scottish�Journal�of�Theology (2005): 104-123.

5. Steve Chalke, cited in Dever, Mark. ‘Too Atonement Centred?’ Christianity Today, May 2006 http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2006/005/9.29.html

6. T. C. Hammond,�In�Understanding�Be�Men:��A�Handbook�of�Christian�Doctrine�(Revised and edited by David F. Wright; Leicester: IVP, 1968), 122.

7. Peter Jensen, cited in Carnley, Reflections, 135.

Imagine this scenario; your non-Christian friend has just asked you why Christians are always on about Jesus and how he died. So you start explaining how Jesus has taken our punishment on himself. Your friend seems to really understand what you’re saying. But then a thought hits you... If your friend isn’t a Christian, can you really say that Jesus died for them? What if they never turn to Christ? How could God punish Jesus for their sins, and end up punishing them as well? That’s a big question.

Did Jesus only die for the ‘elect’? Or did Jesus die for everyone? We’re not going to look at ‘predestination’ or ‘election’ right now, but if we just take those as ‘given’ for the moment, would you say that Christ only died for the elect, or for absolutely everyone? This has been a question I’ve been wrestling with for the past few years as I’ve spoken to students with strong views on either side; some supporting ‘limited atonement’ and some ‘unlimited atonement’1. I’ve found that there are some helpful lines that need to be drawn in the sand.

Jesus’ death will only actually save the electThe Bible presents a simple and clear picture of judgment day – some will be saved, and many will be condemned (Rev 20:11-15). The only hope of being saved is found in Jesus’ death on our behalf (Rom 5:9-10). If Jesus has actually died for your sin, then God

has nothing against you: ‘There is now no condemnation for those in Christ Jesus’ (Rom 8:1). The elect will be saved because Jesus really took their penalty on himself. Ephesians 5:25 says, ‘Christ also loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it’. There is no other way we can be saved from God’s wrath—except through Christ’s death on our behalf. Therefore on the last day, all those who are thrown into hell will be there because Christ’s death did not actually save them. It had no effect on their salvation, no effect on their relationship with God. So in technical terms; Jesus’ death is not ‘effective’ for all, it is only ‘effective’ for the elect—for those who trust in him.

But if Jesus’ death only saves the elect, does that mean that he only died for the elect? This brings us to our second point; how Jesus was related to all humanity.

Jesus’ atoning death was enough to pay for ALL humanity’s sinWhen God the Son took on flesh, he didn’t take on the flesh of just the elect, but the flesh of humanity (John 1:1-14). Jesus didn’t defeat the elect’s enemy, but the enemy of all mankind; death (Heb 2:14-15). Jesus didn’t die for individual�sins but for humanity’s sin (2Cor 5:21; Rom 6:10). That is, when Jesus died, though it only looked like a man dying on a cross, it was an infinite punishment—God the eternal Father was exhausting all his wrath on God the eternal Son. Jesus couldn’t have suffered any more than he did. If God had planned to save just one person or one trillion people, Jesus would have had to undergo the exact same punishment he did. The technical word

Jesus Died for... Who?



David, however, was prepared to accept that the overall biblical testimony is that some people will not be saved, and that personal belief is the distinguishing factor between those who are, and those who are not1. And so, Paul writes in 1 Timothy:

Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst. But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life. (1 Tim 1:15-16)

This is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance (and for this we labor and strive), that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe. (1 Tim 4:9-10)

David’s concern, however, was with the theological basis behind the Bible’s denial of universalism: why is God’s love not universally effective for all people? And so I offered to set myself this task: to convince him that, in fact, I’d rather believe in a God who is the Father only of those who trust in Jesus Christ as Saviour and Lord. Here’s what I came up with …

1. Universalism removes any certainty about the futureIf you are a universalist then you have to reject the biblical testimony; and once you reject God’s record of dealing with us in the past you have no confidence or certainty about how he will act in the future.

2. Universalism denies ultimate retributive justiceIf you are a universalist then you have to reject ultimate retributive justice, which means there is no righting of wrongs, no punishment of crime, and no reckoning for sin. Instinctively we know

for this is ‘sufficient’. Jesus’ atoning death is ‘sufficient’ to pay for all the sins of each and every member of humanity. So 2 Corinthians 5:14 says, ‘Christ has died for all, therefore all have died; and he died for all that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised’.

Therefore we come to a point where we can say that Jesus’ death is sufficient for all, but only effective for some2. This brings us to the third point; how someone can move from being sufficiently atoned for, to being effectively atoned for.

God makes Jesus’ atoning death effective by blessing the elect with faithEven though Jesus’ death is able to save all humanity, it only actually saves those who have faith in Jesus. Or in technical terms; even though Jesus’ death is sufficient to save all humanity, it only effectively saves those who trust in Jesus. Faith unites us to the atoning work of Jesus3. But this faith is not from ourselves, it’s not our own doing, it’s a gift from God (Eph 2:8). God saves his elect by giving them faith, giving them the ability to trust in the all-sufficient atoning work of Christ. Christ’s death was never only for those with faith, but it will only ever save those with faith. On the last day, all humanity will give glory to Jesus who died for them, but only the elect will receive the benefits of Jesus’ death on their behalf. Only the elect will be effectively saved from God’s wrath because they are the only ones God has blessed with faith in Christ their ransom.

It comes down to this. Jesus death is sufficient to save all humanity. But God only gives faith to his elect; this makes Christ’s saving death effective only for them. Only the elect will be saved on the last day. For the rest of mankind, even though Jesus’ death made them saveable, they have not accepted that offer of salvation by putting their faith

“Christ has died for you”, but his death will be of no use to them if they do not put their trust in him.

in Him, and they will face God’s wrath themselves.4 ‘For whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, and whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God’s wrath remains on him’ (John 3:26).

Therefore we can say to our non-Christian friends “Christ has died for you”, but his death will be of no use to them if they do not put their trust in him. We can even say “You were unforgivable to God, but now Christ has made you forgivable, if only you would trust in him.” And as we do, we must pray that our heavenly Father would have mercy on our friends; that he would bless them with faith, and make Christ’s sufficient death effective for them, as he has done to us.

The doctrine of the unlimited sufficiency and the limited effectiveness of the cross drives us both to praise God for his mercy to us in giving us faith, and plead to God for his mercy on others, that he would give them faith also.

David M Moore

Endnotes1. The term ‘Limited Atonement’ comes from the 5

Points of Calvinism detailed in the Synod of Dort in 1619.

2. This is actually the terminology the Synod of Dort used to express their understanding of ‘Limited Atonement’, and by Calvin himself in his commentary on 1John.

3. Although Calvin wasn’t alive at the time of the Synod, he expresses a similar point the third book of the Institutes; ‘so long as we are without Christ and separated from him, nothing which he suffered and did for the salvation of the human race is of the least benefit to us.’ Inst. III.i.1.

4. There is a common representation of the limited atonement debate that offers two unsatisfactory opinions. It imagines two bridges, one is narrow but extends completely across a deep ravine, and represents the idea that Christ only died for the elect. The other imagines a wide bridge which extends most of the way across the ravine, and represents unlimited atonement, since it appears insufficient without faith. The first image is incorrect, because the elect still need faith to cross the ravine, and the second is wrong because Christ’s death is completely sufficient to save all people. A better image would be of a wide, complete bridge, and a God who walks only the elect across it.

Over the last few years I’ve been meeting up regularly with ‘David’, who is a not-yet-Christian post-graduate student on our campus. One issue he was particularly interested in was that of universalism: if God’s love is for all people, and if God is sovereign, then surely all people will be saved.

Advocates of universalism point to 1 Jn 2:2 and 1 Tim 2:3-4 to support their argument:

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world. (1 Jn 2:2)

This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. (1 Tim 2:3-4)

Why I am not a universalist . . .


�0 | SALT Spring 2006

this is wrong: for example, betrayal in marriage demands an accounting. Or to put it very crudely: how would you feel about meeting an unrepentant Hitler in heaven?

3. Universalism leaves no reason to live a moral life nowIf you are a universalist then try working your logic backwards: if you get rid of ultimate retributive justice and judgment then there’s no need for morality now because God doesn’t care how you live.

4. Universalism robs you of “free will”If you are a universalist then you’ve actually gotten rid of human responsibility; you’ve turned people into puppets or robots because all of us will be forced to worship God under compulsion, even if we never wanted to in this life (which might be construed as arrogant and imperialistic …) 2

5. Universalism contradicts every major world religionIf you are a universalist then you have simply dismissed every major world religion—because the only people who believe in universalism are those who don’t believe in anything at all! As an aside: in the religious marketplace, the uniqueness of Christianity is that

The humiliation of the cross changes our lives also. We are Christians—people who have thrown our lot in with Jesus, trusting him with everything we are and have, in obedience to his call to follow him. He calls us to take up our own cross daily, and in doing so we are affected by his cross in more ways than one. This is demonstrated throughout the church’s history, particularly in the persecution of those who believe in Jesus. Those who follow Jesus will suffer, just as he warned, and the treatment of the earliest believers in the New Testament bears this out.

Part of this persecution arises from the offense of the message of the cross itself. An example of this is well demonstrated in a scrawled graffiti from the time of the early church. It shows a crude drawing of a donkey being crucified and reads ‘Alexomenos worships his god’. It mocks savagely Christians who were ‘foolish’ enough to believe that Jesus could be both God and crucified. A god, to Greek thinking, was powerful and while he might walk the earth with mortals, would never be hurt by them. Gods were more powerful

than mortals—this is a basic attribute of a god to Greek thinking. But Christians claimed that Jesus was God and yet had subjected himself to crucifixion at the hands of mortals. This was obviously a ridiculous claim! It was obvious to Greek and Roman minds that Christianity was completely untrue and anyone gullible enough to believe these claims was an idiot. The mockery expressed in this graffiti is the kind of disdain that has often been the response of those who have heard that Jesus was crucified for the sins of the world.

This is no surprise to us. 1 Corinthians tells us that when we declare Jesus’ death and resurrection for sins, it will be understood as foolish. It is outrageous to claim that the sins of the world could be dealt with through the death of one man who is God on a Roman cross in the first century. Yet, as Paul states in 1 Corinthians 1:18-2:5, this death for sins, God’s folly, is wiser than the

wisdom of humanity. No plan that we, as people, have invented has been able to take care of sins. We don’t even know the full scope of our sins, such is the severe limit of our wisdom. But God’s wisdom takes care of a problem that

will lead to our destruction if not dealt with, and that we don’t fully understand. The wisdom of God is declared in the cross, and to those who are dying for lack of the cross, it looks like utter stupidity. Bearing the mockery of those who deride a crucified God is part of the Christian legacy many have carried before us: the Apostles, early Christians, those who endured the graffiti that we see here, and down through the ages to us. This is part of the privilege of being associated with Jesus and telling his good news.

Possibly a less obvious way in which the cross shapes our lives is in our

it’s open to people of every tribe, race, colour and creed; it’s salvation for anyone who calls on the name of Jesus (Rom 10:13).

6. Universalism implies that what happens to others in theory is more important than what happens to you in practiceIf you are a universalist then you might have a theory about what happens to all the people in the world - but at the end of the day, that theory is less important than what happens to you. The issue of the eternal destiny of others is significant; but ultimately we must all stand before God’s judgment seat and answer for the decisions we have made, not what we’ve thought about others.

7. Universalism is a belief in something which makes no differenceIf you are a universalist, and you believe that ultimately everyone will be saved, then you believe in a God who doesn’t really care about what you’ve thought of him during your life.

Not being a universalist is not easy. It means believing what Philippians 2:9-11 says, that some people will bow before Jesus unwillingly, and that it will be their final action before facing an eternity of

judgment. It means believing that when 2 Peter 3:8-9 says God is very very patient, his patience will still run out. And it means believing that Romans 10:14 commits you to the hard task of evangelising this world, because unless people hear the gospel they cannot be saved.

I think Jim Packer summed it up best over 35 years ago:

What did he [Jesus] mean when he spoke of one group going away into eternal life, and the other group going away into eternal punishment, the judgment being based in each case on the basis of what they had done in this life? What did he mean when he spoke of Judas in this way in Mt 26:24, “… good it were for the man if he had not been born”? Universalism is a doctrine of the salvation of Judas. Could our Lord have used these words if he had expected the salvation of Judas? … So I don’t find myself to be a universalist, even though not being one is uncomfortable, and the thought of some being lost troubles and grieves the heart. I find myself obliged to stick to the old view that the choices and decisions of this life are truly decisive, and to evangelize and to preach the gospel in these terms and as an expression of this conviction.3

What did David think of all this? Sadly, he’s not yet convinced. But I’m still praying for him, while there’s still time.

Geoff Lin

Endnotes1. Technically, it’s God’s predestining choice,

but I decided to leave that matter for another rainy day!

2. Personally I don’t think the Bible speaks of “free will” —at least the way we use it. If anything, the Bible speaks in terms of divine sovereignty and human responsibility … but sometimes you must use the lingo to make your point!

3. J I Packer, “The problem of universalism today” in J I Packer,�Collected�Shorter�Writings�of�J�I�Packer,�Vol.�1:�Celebrating�the�Saving�Work�of�God�(Carlisle: Paternoster, 1998), p.178 [repr. from Theological Review, Nov 1969, Vol 5, No 3, 16-24].

Freedom in foolishnessC h u r C h h I S T O r y

What is the cross all about? What does it mean? To the Christian, the cross is the moment of all moments in history. It is where Jesus died for the sins of the world and accomplished the salvation of the world. And for Jesus the cross meant pain, suffering and humiliation.

God saves us: he does it all from start to finish. He gives us what we need for our salvation in the cross of his Son. Far from acting in ways that look wise to us, God’s great act is the epitome of folly. God meets us in the death and humiliation of his own Son.

�� | SALT Spring 2006


understanding that this is the way our sins have been dealt with. This comes to the fore in church history through the teaching of Martin Luther. Luther was a German monk, who inadvertently sparked the Reformations that spread from Germany to many countries throughout Europe by the end of the 16th century. Dubbed the ‘theologian of the cross’ he strongly objected to medieval scholasticism’s line of thinking that saw the cross as necessary, but put the spotlight on our own ability to add to the salvation that Jesus accomplished. That is, God saves us both by the grace that he gives us in the death of Jesus for us, and also by the good things which we do. Scholasticism understood that both were necessary for God to accept us.

The effect of this on ordinary people was profound. The focus of their lives orbited around the church (where they got grace from), and their own efforts in achieving their part in salvation. There was no sense of peace with God. It debilitated efforts to love others—everything people did was tied up with doing enough good works to shore up their own salvation. The system trapped people into trying to save themselves rather than trying to seek the good for other people.

Luther rejected such ideas utterly. He taught from Paul’s letter to the Romans that God accepts those who live only by faith. That is, there is nothing that we bring to Jesus when we ask him to save us—all we have is our sin and despair, which are hardly things that

As Christians we should delight in reading our Bibles. Unfortunately, that often just isn’t the case. Instead, sometimes we find it hard to be motivated to even open them up. However, when confronted with Jesus’ death on the cross even a short reflection shows us how much more seriously we should take God’s word. The following is by no means an exhaustive list of the impact of the cross on Bible reading, but hopefully by the end of it you’ll be encouraged to read the Bible more.

The cross shows that God loves usBut�God�demonstrates�his�own�love�for�us�in�this:�While�we�were�still�sinners,�Christ�died�for�us. (Rom 5:8)

My dad retired from work back in March. For the first time in my life my dad is pretty much always at home. For almost 23 years of my life I’ve mostly only seen him at home at either the breakfast or dinner table. It’s been kind of weird to get used to. But one thing that’s struck me recently is this; whenever the door of my room is open it doesn’t take very long at all for my dad to come along and lean against my doorframe and start talking. And talking… and talking…and I wonder when he’s going to stop. Now, my dad isn’t a talkative man, in fact he’s one of the quietest men I know. So

what’s going on? Simply this, he’s my dad. He loves me. He wants to talk to me.

Our Heavenly Dad loves us more than we realise. We see this at the cross. He sent his son to die for us while we were sinners, while we were his enemies, even while we had the door shut in his face. Jesus’ death says that even though we had shut the door on God he’s done everything that needs to be done for us to be able to relate to him. His heart yearns to talk to us, listen to what he says:

Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens up the door, I will come in and eat with him and he with me. (Revelation 3:20)

As Colin Buchanan says, ‘Rat tat tat! Open up that door’1.

add to the salvation of the cross. God works in us through his Spirit to bring us to repentance, and it is through his work in us that we acknowledge our sin and come to him for forgiveness. God then has good things which he has prepared in advance for us to do, but these good things do not enhance our salvation, they express it. We are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, all based on the work he did on the cross. This understanding of the centrality of the cross provided the scaffolding for Luther’s theology.

Luther condemned scholasticism as being a ‘theology of glory’. It focused on the palatable aspects of God, overlooking or minimising the messiness of Jesus’ crucifixion and its centrality in God’s plan. It is a picture of a God who acts in ways that humans see as strong and wise and who recognises and rewards human achievement. So, it glides over the utter sinfulness of humanity and misunderstands the depths of God’s love for us as sinners. God does not, as the scholastics taught, help us to be saved. Salvation is not a reward for those who try their best. God saves us: he does it all from start to finish. He gives us what we need for our salvation in the cross of his Son. Far from acting in ways that look wise to us, God’s great act is the epitome of folly. God meets us in the death and humiliation of his own Son.

Luther’s teaching on the cross led him down an unexpected path. He found

‘Because Luther’s teaching is rooted in Scripture it is still relevant for us today’.

himself in conflict with the Roman Catholic church and his life was often in danger because of what he taught. Yet, he doggedly pursued his belief that the cross of Christ was central and sufficient for Christians. In doing so, he set Christians free to love God and the people around them because of their certainty that Jesus’ death was sufficient to make them right with God. No longer were people trapped into doing enough good things to be friends with God. Now a person could rely entirely on Christ for their salvation and use all their time, energy and resources to love God and the people around them. They had nothing to prove. They were free!

Because Luther’s teaching is rooted in Scripture it is still relevant for us today. He helps us understand that the cross is central to our lives. It is the moment when our Saviour accomplished our salvation and it shapes our lives. For centuries, Christians (including Luther) have felt the scorn of the world as it looks at the cross and deems it thoroughly stupid, and we continue to feel this derision today. But the cross is the place of our salvation—it is the place where Jesus shouldered the burden of our sins and so set us free to live lives of love. Paradoxically, the place of Jesus’ execution is the place of our liberation. God’s folly and weakness is wisdom and strength beyond the telling.

Jennie Baddeley

The Cross and Bible reading



The cross is a call to holinessWe have died with Christ if we follow him. When he died our sinful body was crucified with him. But Jesus didn’t remain dead; through the power of God’s Spirit he was raised to life three days later.

Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him…In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its evil desires. Do not offer the parts of your body to sin, as instruments of wickedness, but rather offer yourselves to God, as those who have been brought from death to life; and offer the parts of your body to him as instruments of righteousness. For sin shall not be your master, because you are not under law, but under grace. (Rom 6:8, 11-14)

Who is your master? As God’s people we live by grace and nothing that is sinful should master us. When we are tempted as Christians to do things which seem right in the world’s eyes

we must remember that the world is playing a different song as instruments of wickedness. Our tune has no harmony with theirs. As a musician I know that the way to learn a song you’ve never heard before is to read the music. A Christian’s music is the Bible. Without reading the Bible we will not know how to be instruments of righteousness. The instructions on how to live a holy life will only be found in God’s word. Let’s read the Bible so that we can live

Singing one song of the King Faithful God, salvation brings, With our hearts we join the cry That Jesus is our song2.

The cross reminds us there’s a war onJesus has won the victory on the cross for us. That is truth. But what is also true is that the devil is still active and so very powerful. He sneaks around hidden among the believers trying to deceive them and he tricks us. Just when we think we are standing firm he will try to topple us. Do we have any hope? Yes, absolutely! Christ has won and as we continue the battle the Holy Spirit is

within us as his true people. And the sword of the Spirit is the Word of God. Paul tells us—

�Put on the full armour of God so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes…Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist…Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. And pray. (Eph 6:11, 14, 17).

If we understand the enormous ramifications of spiritual warfare that happened at the cross we will be driven to read our Bibles. The word is living and active, sharper than a double-edged sword—go use it!

And finally brothers (and sisters)—JoyRejoice�in�the�LORD�always.�I�will�say�it�again,�rejoice!�(Phil 4:4)

The cross is an amazing act of salvation from God for us. When we understand the massive implications of the cross for our lives as Christians we should be filled with joy that we have been rescued from what we could not escape from. Joy? What has joy got to do with Bible reading? Bible reading is not an intellectual exercise. Bible reading is part of our living relationship with God. A relationship that started with God’s love for us when we least deserved it. And a Christian’s joy and food is the word of God, ‘When your words came, I ate them; they were my joy and my heart’s delight.’ (Jer 15:16) That’s right, our heart’s delight.

I hope your heart delights in the wonder of the work of our Lord at the cross and makes you yearn to read God’s word more and more every day. Why don’t you start right now?

Alison Laird

Endnotes1. Revelation 3:20 Lyrics: © God in Dad style

through Colin Buchanan. From the album Remember the Lord. © 1996 Wanaaring Road Music.

2. Jesus is Our Song Lyrics: © 2005 Tony Payne & Philip Percival. From the album Emu Live 2–See Him Coming. © 2005 Emu Music Australia Inc.

Then he said to them all: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit his very self?” (Lk 9:23-25)

We’ve all heard it. From the pages of the Bible, from various pulpits, from the lips of fellow Christians, the idea of taking up your cross is bandied around in Christian circles. The good thing about this is that it’s Jesus’ idea, so we aren’t just throwing around the latest evangelical fad phrase. But familiarity breeds contempt, as the saying goes. Have we allowed the phrase ‘taking up your cross’ to become something of a rather mundane Christian cliché? Have you ever stopped to reflect on the depth and breadth of this phrase?

What does it mean?The ancient Roman world within which Jesus lived was really not all that different from ours. People didn’t carry around crosses for fun, then or now. If you saw someone carrying a cross in Jesus’ time, you knew that he was heading towards great suffering, shame and death by crucifixion. So Jesus’ call to his followers is a call to public discipleship—one does not take up one’s cross merely in the privacy of one’s

bedroom. It’s a call to suffering, shame and death.

I’ve heard people describe our crosses as burdens we have to bear in our Christian lives—the chronically ill relative, the demanding boss, a short temper, recurring health problems. So taking up your cross means putting up with these things for the sake of Christ, enduring them and soldiering on. I don’t think that’s what Jesus meant exactly— in the picture of crucifixion, the cross is the instrument by which you die. If these things are the instruments by which you die to yourself, deny yourself, are set free from the real burden of living for yourself, then in that way they are your cross and you should carry them.

But if these things are burdens that worry you, that weigh you down, then they are not your personal cross to take up. It is for freedom that Christ has set us free (Gal 5:1), and we should be able to take the heavy things that make us drag our feet in the Christian life, that lead to emotional and spiritual collapse, to God our Saviour, and praise him, the Lord who daily bears our burdens (Ps 68:18-20). The things which keep us from joyful focus on and obedience to Christ are not crosses to be borne alone with indomitable fortitude; they are

things to be given up to Christ in prayer, and to be shared with our brothers and sisters in Christ, so that we can all carry one another’s burdens and in this way fulfil the law of Christ (Gal 6:2).

Yet it is also true that each one should carry his own load (Gal 6:5), and Christ’s command still goes out to individuals to deny yourself and take up your cross. If that doesn’t look like strong stoic soldiering on despite the cares of life, what does it look like?

What does it look like?It looks like cutting the chains of things that bind us to selfish desires. It looks like being unleashed from the love of the comforts and pleasures of this world. It looks like throwing off the yokes that

Taking up your cross: cliché or calling?

‘...we should be able to take the heavy things that make us drag our feet in the Christian life, that lead to emotional and spiritual collapse, to God our Saviour, and praise him, the Lord who daily bears our burdens. (Ps 68:18-20)’...



Leon Lamb Morris was perhaps Australia’s most prolific biblical and theological author. He wrote over fifty books of theology and biblical commentary which have sold nearly two million copies worldwide and been translated into many languages. This is an astonishing output for an Australian writing technical or academic books. He was well-known throughout the Christian world as a careful, conservative biblical scholar.

Born in Lithgow in March 1914, his father was an iron founder. Morris began training as a teacher in 1931 with a degree in science. In his first year he was converted to Christ in the Anglican parish of Leichhardt under the ministry of R B Robinson. At the Katoomba Convention the next year he felt the call to ordained ministry. Having qualified as a science teacher he was required to serve out the five years of his bond to the Department of Education. However while he worked as teacher, he studied in his spare time for a Licentiate in Theology and topped the Australian College of

Theology List. He was ordained to a curacy in Campsie in 1938.

In 1940, he began five years as minister of the vast Minnipa Mission in outback South Australia during the difficult years of World War Two. He continued his private studies at this time, gaining the Bachelor of Divinity from London University with first class honours in 1943 and the Master of Theology in 1946. Mildred, whom he married in 1941, would drive the bumpy, dusty roads of South Australia while Leon studied New Testament Greek in the passenger seat.

In 1945, Leon became Vice-Principal of Ridley College in Melbourne.

He spent 1950-51 in Cambridge gaining his Ph D which was later published as The�Apostolic�Preaching�of�the�Cross, a book which became seminal for modern evangelical theology. He defended the substitutionary atonement, penal substitution, the death of Christ as a means of propitiation assuaging the wrath of God, the death of Christ as effective redemption, and the centrality of the cross of Christ in Biblical Theology.

He was told by his Ph D examiners that they did not agree with his ideas on the death of Christ, but that they thought that he had written what the apostle

enslave us to think anything profit that is not for the sake of Christ, anything gain that is not the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus our Lord (Phil 3:7-11). Taking up your cross and following Jesus actually comes to look less like sacrifice and more like a freedom march.

That shouldn’t surprise us, of course, because Jesus calls us to follow him, the one whose death and resurrection made him victorious over death, Satan, the world, and sin—and�us�victors�in�him�(2 Cor 2:14, Rom 8:37). It excites me to think that Christ has made it possible for me to live a new life in which I can worship a holy God acceptably, can have a pure heart and clean hands that desire and do the truly good things the Lord of all creation wants.

Dear friends, now we are children of God and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when he appears, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is. Everyone who has this hope in him purifies himself, just as he is pure. (1 Jn 3:2-3)

But on the way to this hope, suffering and sacrifice are involved in our freedom march, because of course if you are marching there are many things you are not doing. As with freedom marchers in our world, we will have to face the taunts, scorn and even physical attacks of those who oppose our leader. But this is a march to freedom, of such quality that a costs-benefits analysis would no doubt find it well worth the sacrifices made to obtain it. This attitude that turns sacrifice into joy has characterised Christians who have gone before us, like David Livingstone, missionary to Africa, who is memorably quoted as having said, “I never made a sacrifice.” Indeed, what a privilege has been granted us to be marching behind none other than the glorious Lord Jesus!

Taking up our cross is not about all the hard stuff in being a Christian—it’s the goods. For Jesus has set us free to be able to daily die more and more to

ourselves and live more and more for him—and we are free indeed. Jesus has set us free to be able to daily choose by God’s grace not to live for the praise and approval of others but for the praise of God (both that he may praise us and that others may praise him—see 1 Cor 4:5, Phil 1:11)—and we are free indeed. Jesus has set us free to fix our eyes and set our fierce yearning not on the empty promises of this world but on the sure hope of comfort, security, rest, joy, peace, fulfilment, and life to the full in the world to come—and we are free indeed.

Taking up your cross daily looks like saying every single day, “yes, Jesus, what you say is what is true, what you tell me to desire are the desires that will bring me joy, what you say to put to death, I will put to death—sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desires and greed (Col 3:5), malice, deceit, hypocrisy, envy, slander of every kind (1 Pet 2:1), everything that contaminates body and spirit (2 Cor. 7:1).”

Taking up your cross looks like running joyfully in the path of God’s commands, for he has set your heart free (Ps 119:32). Taking up your cross means eagerly rejoicing in suffering for Christ’s

sake, whether this looks like going off to Pakistan as a missionary and suffering from lack of toilet paper, no supportive friends and family, no dark chocolate, and no certainty that an extremist will not break into your church and open fire, or staying in Australia and sacrificing achievements in house, car, job, education, ‘self-development’, leisure pursuits—anything and everything for the sake of the work of Christ.

Whatever we are called to give up for the sake of Christ, he has first given up for our sake. So taking up your cross looks like following where our great pioneer, the author and perfecter of our faith, has already gone—through suffering and death which are far outshone by the joy and glory of the resurrection hope ahead (Heb 12:2, 2 Cor 4:17). Taking up your cross is taking hold of that for which Christ Jesus has taken hold of us (Phil 4:12), through death into life.

Why should we do it?What is holding you back from running full tilt into life lived all out for Jesus Christ and him alone? What are the burdens that are weighing you down so you cannot rise with Christ into the newness of life, lived not for the hollow deceptive things that our world values, but for the rich and satisfying joy of living for the glory of God? What is keeping you from wholeheartedly dying to all the things that Jesus died to set us free from so that they are no longer what motivate and excite you?

Jesus’ calling to those who will listen is to take up your cross daily and follow him into the life abundant and everlasting. Why should we do it? Because these are Jesus’ words and Jesus’ promises. So take up your cross with inexpressible and glorious joy, for as you do so, you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls (1 Pet 1:8-9). Rejoice with me as we take up our crosses together, my brothers and sisters in Christ, for if the Son sets you free, you will be free�indeed (Jn 8:36).

Valerie Ting

LEON MORRIS15.3.1914 – 24.7.2006

Paul taught, so they had to grant Leon his degree!

In 1961, Leon accepted the position of Warden at Tyndale House in Cambridge, a significant evangelical biblical research centre. In 1964, he returned to Ridley College as Principal. During his fifteen years as Principal, he strengthened the college, gave it a worldwide reputation, and established Ridley College as an official residential college of Melbourne University, the first college to take both men and women.

During these years he continued his prolific writing, publishing commentaries on almost every book of the New Testament, many of which remain classics. He was in demand as a lecturer and preacher in Australia and overseas where he was visiting professor in a number of colleges. His style was famous for his dry wit, conciseness, simplicity and attention to the detail of the biblical text applied relevantly.

He was an AFES Vice President, spoke extensively for IVF/AFES groups in universities for many years, and his books and commentaries have helped many students in their desire to learn and understand God’s words in Scripture. He was a humble man, who used his great gifts in the service of Christ and the gospel.

Dr Peter Adam



Busting Art Myths

As a wannabe film maker I would like to think of myself as an artist (anyone who has seen any of my films will be laughing at this point!). However, when I mention the fact that my hobby is filmmaking to my friends at church they often give me this look of “6oh yes, um, right” or they say “that must be a great way of communicating the Gospel”. These conversations got me wondering about where do creative arts fit into the Christian community? There is probably heaps more discussion that needs to be had about this, but here I will raise a few ideas and myths that I have come across in conversations and reading about the subject.

The Artist in the Christian world: An Alien?Anyone in the Christian world who has an artistic bent at times feels like an alien. This is true whether the art is music, sculpture, film, poetry, music, painting or any other art. When the idea of art comes up, often one of the first verses mentioned is the second commandment:

“You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments1”

The implication that has been made in the past is that being creative is a sign of idolatry, since creative people present something to be worshipped apart from God. This is a subject we shall come back to. But it doesn’t look good for the creative arts.

On the other hand there has been a voice, sometimes weak, sometimes strong, reminding us that there is a place for arts in the Christian community. It reminds us that the creative arts are not listed with the other evils in the world like adultery or lying. In fact the arts have an essential part to play in the Christian community.

Neither side is actually right. From the side of those who want to protect the arts there have been a few myths that have popped up that I want to explore and bust:

Myth 1: we have to be creative because God is creativeActually it is the complete opposite. The fact that we are the creature and God, alone, is the creator is one of the things that makes him distinct2. What artist can create ex nihilio3? That God is The Creator is a constant reminder to us that he is God and we are not. We can never create in the same way he creates. So to say that we must be creative because God is creator is to grasp at something that makes God God.

But we can respond to that creation. For example, one of the calls of

witnessing God’s work in the world is to sing. Not only that but to ‘sing a new song’4. Creativity is needed for this to take place. It is a good thing to be creative in the light of what God has done for us. Of course we do not all have to be creative nor creative in the same way (engineers: sigh a sigh of relief!). This, I think, does not merely apply to songs, but to any endeavour of the arts.

Myth 2: all art is a legitimate form of ministryThere are all kinds of art, and all art has an effect on you. It might stimulate you, offend you, convince you, confuse you, make you feel mad, bad or sad, it might even bore you. Keep in mind that advertising is a form of art, with the goal of persuading you. Art in the Christian culture can be the same. But this does not mean all art is a legitimate form of ministry.

Michael Card writes: “If what we create, write, dance and sing can open up such a space in time which God may speak, imagine the possibilities”5. But this is to assume that God chooses to speak through all art, an assumption that a lot of artists make, possibly for the reason of legitimising their art.

Let me make two distinctions at this point. The first is that there can be actions that work to build the body of Christ, as a response to God’s work in the world. This might be preaching and teaching the Bible, encouraging people at church, giving money to the work of the Gospel. We will call this ‘ministry’6. There are also actions that are the response to God’s work in the world that don’t build anyone else up, we just want to do them. This might be singing, praising God in prayer, any number of things. Let’s call this ‘expression’.

This distinction is similar to the difference that Paul makes between prophecy and speaking in tongues in 1 Corinthians 14. There is a lot of debate about what these gifts actually are. But whatever they are, one builds up the self and the other the church (v4). One is a ‘ministry’ and the other is ‘expression’. While the ‘ministry’ gift is the more desirable, it does not make the ‘expression’ gift bad in any way.

Let me say clearly at this point, just because something does not build other people up in the Lord as a response to His work in the world, it does not make it bad, just different.

Some art can be ministry, some art can be expression. Some songs for instance

can be used for the building up of God’s people. Some paintings can be just an expression of how we feel about the complexities of the cross. Art does not have to be ministry, it can be expression —and that is OK.

This therefore means that not all art done by a Christian need be “Christian”. I was recently talking with a friend who is an artist. She made the comment that she creates her art because she wants to and this does not mean that there will be explicitly Christian messages in her art. Although she did point out that God’s order in creation is her underlying understanding about what makes art ‘art’.

The second distinction at this point is that of intent and incidence7. A piece of art can be intended for one thing but can be used incidentally for something else. For example an artist can paint a picture expressing the love of God shown on the cross. The intent is expression. Others may look at the picture; most might look at it and think of it as a piece of art. But one person may look at it and see that this is what their Christian friends have been saying about the Gospel and all of a sudden it is clear to them, they bow their knee to Jesus. This is God using the piece of art incidentally.

Of course the opposite can happen as well. A piece of art might be intended as ministry, say poetry for the building up of God’s kingdom. But it only works for the poet, and no-one else. It does not fulfil its intention. If you are using art you

may need to be prepared for this. Not all art intended for ministry is ministry.

Myth 3: all ‘Christian’ art is to the glory of GodFor this last point we need to return to the issue of idolatry. There is good art and bad art. Bad art, as we have seen above, could be making an idol to worship. Porn has been argued as an art form. On the other hand there is some art that reflects the beauty of God. God is the one who defines what is ‘good art’ and what is ‘bad art’. Some art done in the name of Christ may be bad art. This might be art that is used to show how good the artist is. For example a piece of music that is written to show that the person is a great musician.

The question the artist needs to ask is this: What am I doing this for? Is it to help people know and love Jesus better? (Ministry). Is it because this is my response to the Gospel? (Expression). Or is it because I am good artist and I need to express my art? (Read: I need to show everyone how good I am).

If it is this last one then you need to remember that you only have this gift because God gave it to you. If you were using your gift to convey yourself it would be horrible, ugly and useless.

Further, there is no reason that all art done by a Christian need to be explicitly Christian.

I have not tried to give a complete understanding of the role of the arts in the Christian community, but to give some clarification in the discussion. Art is something that is fundamental to the human being, whether it is paintings on a cave wall or a multimedia production. But like all human endeavours it needs to be brought under the rule of Christ.

Peter Hughes

Endnotes1. Exodus 20:4-6

2. See Job and Isaiah

3. “Out of nothing”

4. See Psalm 33:3, 40:3, 96:1, 98:1, 144:9, 149:1; Isaiah 42:10; Revelation 5:9, 14:3.

5. Michael Card, Scribbling�in�the�Sand:�Christ�and�Creativity (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press. 2002). p17

6. Defining ministry is far harder than I have here, but let’s accept it for the sake of argument.

7. Thanks to Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Art in Action: Toward a Christian Aesthetic (Cultural classics. Carlisle: Solway. 1997). for pointing out this distinction.


20 | SALT Spring 2006review

s

reviews

Though it may seem like Christians and Muslims are worlds apart, you may have more in common than you thought. A serious Muslim will be trying to live to please Allah in his or her life, as Christians we live to please Jesus Christ. We hold to similar moral values: neither a Muslim nor a Christian will be thrilled with the laissez faire attitudes of most uni students to sexuality and sexual expression. Both groups will be seeking to engage with a largely complacent university community, to try to persuade them that their beliefs are intellectually coherant and worth adopting. Both should be concerned with helping the poor. Even though the belief bases are radically different, you may find that Christians have more in common with Muslims, than with ‘Aussie pagans’ after all!

While in most conversations we struggle to find ways to talk about Jesus, if you talk with a Muslim you are likely to find yourself talking about him very quickly. It’s quite easy to reach the point of explaining the gospel to a devout Muslim. They think about God, and many come from a background which espouses respect for Christians and Jews.

However, while conversations will move quickly to God and the gospel, you may find that your conversations rapidly become difficult and complex. A Muslim is likely to raise many objections to the gospel and to Christian beliefs—if you’re not prepared for these objections it’s easy to feel somewhat lost and maybe even a bit vulnerable. However, with some preparation, engagement with Muslims can stimulate you to growth and learning, and be an encouragement to you in your Christian faith.

One of the best ways to equip yourself to engage meaningfully with Muslim friends and study colleagues is to work through Sam Green’s Engaging�with�Islam�course. Sam has drawn on many years of research and engagement with Islamic believers to develop a course useful for Christians who want to be informed about Islam and share the gospel effectively with Muslims.

The course runs over seven sessions. Each week there is pre-reading to do, a DVD presentation and some discussion questions to follow up. Sam uses Islamic sources in the pre-reading as the main material for learning. Some of it is translated from very old texts, which means that it can be a bit tough to get

Engaging with Islam DVD/Workbook by Samuel GreenAFES, 2006

Islam is everywhere. It’s all over our TV screens and newspapers. On many campuses there are Islamic Awareness Weeks and other lectures on Islamic topics, especially the connection between terrorist attacks and the rise of ‘Islamophobia’. Many of us see Muslims on campus and in our local area every day. We sometimes don’t know how to treat them. Some of us might be committed to friendship evangelism with fellow ‘Aussie pagan’ students, but feel that Muslim students are in the too hard basket. It can seem easier to leave them alone, than to befriend and seek to understand them. We may even feel a little Islamophobic ourselves—because Muslims seem so different and because of recent terrorist acts linked with Islamic extremists.

through, especially in the first session. However, it is well worth the effort as you’ll get a view of Islam ‘straight from the horse’s mouth’.

Sam also helps us as Christians to understand how Islamic beliefs differ from our own Bible based beliefs. For example Islam seeks to bring the rule of Allah to this present world, whereas Christians know that humans cannot bring about God’s rule. We are waiting for the coming of a kingdom that is not of this world, a kingdom that Christ has already won for us through his death and resurrection.

There are practical tips for relating to Muslims in the course too, especially in the final session. Sam demystifies Islam and Islamic practices. Muslims are people just like the rest of us, even if their way of life appears very different. Sam gives pointers about avoiding unnecessary offence to Muslims, especially with regard to what we eat and wear. At the same time, he points out that while it is useful to be

informed about Islam when speaking with a Muslim, the gospel is powerful and effective, even if we don’t have the main points of Islam down pat, or a perfect rebuttal for every objection that a Muslim might raise. Also, just as there are many different kinds of people who wear the label Christian (not all of whom actually trust in Jesus as Saviour and Lord), so too there are many different beliefs and practices associated with Islam. We need to get to know each person as an individual, without pre-judging them.

I strongly recommend using Sam’s course on your campus. The facilitator of the course doesn’t need to have any specialised knowledge of Islam, so long as they’re committed to the reading between sessions. Sam has designed the course to run in an hour. I may have had a chattier group than his test group: we left some questions out, but still found it a struggle to get through everything in an hour and a quarter! So you may want to schedule more time than Sam suggests, though you’ll

Where did Bell’s Cross go?

…There is healing we need from the cross every single day. Which leads to forgiveness. The point of the cross isn’t forgiveness. Forgiveness leads to something much bigger: restoration5.

Again, this sounds pretty close to what the Bible says about the cross. The point of the cross is that we are to be reconciled to God, to be brought back into a relationship with God6.

But the question is: ‘is the legal transaction of the cross the important thing?’ What I mean is, is it so important for the cross to be seen as a legal transaction of paying for sin and removing God’s wrath from us above all else?

One way to think of Christian doctrine is like a web. If you play with one strand it affects all the others. In the case of Bell it affects his view of repentance:

The remaking of this world is why Jesus’ first messages began with “T’shuva, for the kingdom of heaven has come near”. The Hebrew word T’shuva means to return. Return to the people we were originally created to be. The people God is remaking us into7.

Throughout his chapter on repentance Bell explains that repentance is not something we are called to do, it is what God is doing to us. This is not to deny that God does not transform us into the people that are more like His Son. But this is not repentance. Jesus’ opening words in Mark’s Gospel are “The time has come…the Kingdom of God is near. Repent and believe the good news”. He does not say ‘be repented’, but repent.

For Bell, this means that sin is not something that we do, rather it is what causes our pain. Sin does cause pain, but it is also something that we do. It is something God is angry about and something we are guilty of8 and is the reason we need a legal transaction to save us. It was what Jesus came to save us from. If you get a chance to watch a NOOMA DVD, ask the question “where is the cross here?”

It is an easy thing to move the legal transaction of the cross from its central place and put something else more appealing there. But it is dangerous. Talking about the cross is talking about why the Son of God came. Encourage your staffworker to keep on about the cross!

Peter Hughes

ReferencesNOOMADVD series by Rob Bell. Zondervan, 2005Velvet�ElvisBy Rob Bell. Zondervan, 2005

Endnotes1. The Muslim view.2. A view held by some liberal theologians.3. Rob Bell, Velvet�Elvis�(Grand Rapids, Michigan:

Zondervan. 2005). p107.4. Bell, p107.5. Bell, p108.6. See 2 Corinthians 5:16-21 for example.7. Bell, p150. By the way, we don’t have the Hebrew

term for what Jesus said. We only have the Greek term metanonia.

8. Ephesians 2:1-3

reviews still get a good overview if you can only manage an hour.

As well as running Sam’s course, try to get involved with Muslims on your campus. Attend Islamic Awareness Week and ask questions if there’s a question time. Spend time getting to know Muslims in your lectures and tutorials. Make use of any opportunity you might have to visit the prayer facility. On many campuses simply knocking on the door and politely asking for someone to show you around will open up conversation opportunities. Of course, try to respect Muslim values by limiting your contact to people of the same sex.

Talking with Muslims may sound scary, but most Muslims are very happy to have contact with non-Muslims and will appreciate opportunities to talk about their faith and learn about Christianity. At Melbourne Uni we have run some successful interfaith gatherings, where we have demonstrated to the university community that even though we believe different things, we can engage in

peaceful dialogue. Why not contact Muslim and Jewish organisations on your campus to see if your group can organise a similar event? Christian students who have participated have had plentiful opportunities to explain the gospel. They have also found that their faith in Jesus has been strengthened as they’ve learned about other religions. As Christians we have a depth of assurance and freedom in Christ that cannot be found in anyone or anything else. Only Christ can save us from our sins and guarantee us eternal life (Acts 4:12).

Natasha Godfrey

Resources(DVD�$25,�workbook�$7�—�includes�postage).To�order�email�[email protected]�or call the National Office on 02 9697 0313.

You can contact Sam, download up to date course notes, and learn more at www.engaging-with-islam.info/

Answering Islam is also helpful, and has many articles written by Sam online http://answering-islam.org/

Natasha is happy to be emailed with questions about engaging with Muslims and Jews on campus [email protected]

‘While in most conversations we struggle to find ways to talk about Jesus, if you talk with a Muslim you are likely to find yourself talking about him very quickly. It’s quite easy to reach the point of explaining the gospel to a devout Muslim.’

False teaching can come in all sorts of guises. Some can be outright denial. For example, in the case of the Cross this might be that Jesus did not die1 or that he did not die for sins2. But other can be that it is not a denial of doctrine, but a move of emphasis. This can be just as dangerous.

Recently, something called the Emerging Church Movement has reached Australian shores. This is movement has a number of styles, proponents and views. One of the coolest to come out of the US has been Rob Bell. He has a book called Velvet�Elvis, but is really known for his NOOMA DVDs.

The DVDs are 12-minute messages where Bell speaks straight at you. They are warm, friendly, and funky with great music and great visuals. They are perfect for giving to other people and that is what people are doing. But what does Bell make of the cross?

In one sense, salvation is a legal transaction. Humans are guilty because of our sin, and God is the judge who has to deal with our sin because he is holy and any act of sin goes against his core nature. He has to deal with it. Enter Jesus, who dies on the cross in our place. Jesus gets what we deserve; we get what Jesus deserves3.

If you are thinking this sounds like straight teaching on the cross, you are right, it is. But Bell has more to say:

For Jesus however, salvation is far more. It includes this understanding, but it is far more comprehensive— it is a way of life. To be saved or redeemed or set free is to enter into a totally new way of living in harmony with God4.

2� | SALT Spring 2006

22 | SALT Spring 2006 Book review

s

Book reviews

Jesus Says GoBy Robin WellsMonarch Books, 2006We live in a world of contradictions. While our society plunges headfirst into hedonism (the pursuit of self-gratification and pleasure), there is an ever growing number of young people who are passionate for Christ, driven to craft their vocation and profession with the cause of the gospel in mind.

These people are longing to dedicate their lives to making a difference in this world. They watch the starving child on the World Vision ad and are moved to compassion. They hear of the two billion worldwide who’ve never even heard of Jesus and ask, ‘How can I make a difference?’ This is what excites me about Generation Y and what makes this book, Jesus�Says�Go,�so timely.

Jesus�Says�Go�exposes us to the world of global mission, yet it does so in a refreshingly down-to-earth manner. Rather than portraying super spiritual people doing unbelievable things, the author unpacks the challenges and struggles faced by ordinary people serving Christ overseas, including

the western culture of comfort; cross cultural transition; expectations in ministry; suffering; career and money; and marriage, family and singleness.

In the final chapters we’re taken on a biblical journey into God’s missionary heart, seeing it unfold from Genesis through to its culmination. We’re challenged to transform our own worldview to understand that “Christianity without mission is Christianity no longer” (p140). It’s in these final pages that we discover the greatest riches, as well as the greatest

Book reviews challenge—that we cannot claim to be authentic Bible-believing Christians if we aren’t missionary Christians.

Whilst a strength of the book is its realistic portrayal of the cost of serving Christ overseas, this might also be a weakness. I would have liked to have read a more complete perspective that includes delving into the joy that comes from living whole-heartedly for Christ. For example, examining further the statement “Christ’s service, even when costly, is true wealth, not deprivation” (p 85) and Paul’s testimony, “I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord” (Phil 3:8). A book that explores this, and would make a great companion to read alongside Jesus�Says�Go,�would be John Piper’s Don’t�Waste�Your�Life�(Crossway Books, 2003).

Personally I think�Jesus�Says�Go is a must read for everyone. The book provides an honest and in-depth perspective of the cost of serving Christ overseas, invaluable for those considering going as well as the many who will support them.

Richard More

RRP $16.95Available from AFES National Office for the special price of $15.00 (including postage)—call 02 9697 0313

But I don’t read:Where to Lord?Matthias MediaThis is the ideal resource for the young Bible study leader who is not sure how to direct the group, because the studies do it for you.

There is a set of six studies in a booklet with all the normal things that studies have – questions for introductions, comprehension and application. But there is also a DVD or video that accompanies it. This DVD contains several short (3-4 minute) connections between the different parts of the study by Tony Payne. These connections are important because the study is not exegetically working through a part of the Bible, but is looking at the subject of guidance. Such studies are not easy to guide people through and having someone who knows where it is all going can be helpful. As the leader, you

Fifty reasons Why Jesus Came to Dieby John PiperCrossway Books, Wheaton, 2006Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die is a recent book by John Piper, which not surprisingly deals with the purpose of Jesus’ death. It is a book designed to explore what Jesus’ death achieved for us.

Piper’s style is a great marriage of thoughtful reflection with passionate devotion. Short chapters make it easy to read, but the sheer amount of content means it is best read slowly. It can take a while to think through the complexity of what he is saying and to check it against Scripture, which Piper helpfully peppers throughout each chapter. It would make a great book for group discussion, not least because Piper makes strong, sometime controversial statements, which should make for lively interaction!

Although written for non-Christians, its complexity and focus on predestination could distract those who don’t know Jesus. The introduction is a great defense of genuine Christianity in the wake of the evil treatment by supposed

Christians towards the Jewish people in the World War II concentration camps. But even so it would be unhelpful to give this to most non-Christians.

On the whole, this book comes highly recommended. It reminded me of the enormity of what Jesus has done for us. Particularly, if you haven’t thought through the purpose of Jesus’ death, or you think you know it all or you aren’t sure that you could give a response to someone if they asked you the question “Why did Jesus die?” then I would

But I don’t read:Genuine ImitationMatthias MediaThis is an interactive guide to the book of Thessalonians. Basically what happens is that you click on a section of the guide and it takes you through a part of the book, with an audio guide or sometimes a video guide. If you have hearing problems, or just like to read, there are transcripts of the guides readily available.

There are sections on background, passages and themes of the letter. There are tools on how to write a study and teach the book and be able to take your own notes as you study. Under each section of the passages there is a subsection dealing with context, observation, meanings of particularly difficult sections, applications and some advice on teaching the passages, especially to a small group.

One of the things that I like most about the guide is the animations of the passages, where the passages are placed phrase by phrase into patterns of sub-clauses, etc. Some might argue that this is the guide imposing its own understanding of the text on us, but in its defence that is what any other commentary does as well.

For a non-reader this will be great as you hear someone read the notes out and have the animations make sense of what is going on and feel like someone is taking you through the passage. The downside is that as a ‘reader’, I found the whole process a little too slow. It is ideal for the rookie Bible study leader who is unsure of how to write studies, what resources to use and what they should be looking at in the passage, because it not only teaches about 1 Thessalonians, it also implicitly teaches how to study a book of the Bible.

This is a great resource, worth the money and if you want to get into a book

of the Bible in great depth then this might be the one for you. I am looking forward to Matthias Media presenting more of these.

Peter Hughes

$24.50, available from www.matthiasmedia.com.au

is also helpful because of the topic. The idea of guidance is ‘key’ to the Christian life and one that many Christians don’t spend a lot of time on. This is very similar to Guidance�and�the�Voice�of�God, also with Tony as a co-author, but I think these studies have a better approach because rather than eschatology, or where God is leading his people, as the basis of guidance this places the foundation on who God is.

While this is a good resource for a young Bible study leader it may not be helpful for everyone. While some might find the format of someone speaking to them more helpful than reading I found it a little frustrating as I felt I could have read the material quicker. Also I need to warn you that the background against which Tony is speaking can make the video a little bland visually.

Peter Hughes

DVD/Video $28.50, workbook $7.50, available from www.matthiasmedia.com.au

may even prefer to watch beforehand and then take the group through yourself.

Not only is the resource a helpful one to have because of its methodology, but it

encourage you to read it. It is likely to enrich your understanding of Jesus’ death and so cause you to both rejoice in his love for you, and spur you on to tell others of his death and resurrection for us.

Jennie Baddeley

Available from most Christian bookshops.



Contributors

Jennie Baddeley Jennie is working on a thesis in John’s Gospel at the moment. She’s married to Mark and they live in the Moore College community at MooreWest in Parramatta. Jennie enjoys reading, music, walking and playing obscure board games.

Peter Hughes Peter is the Sydney Area Director and spends time working with staff and students all around Sydney, especially at UTS Kuring-gai. He is married to Audrey and has a son, Calvin, and a daughter, Kia. He loves moves and reading and working out what makes films and books work and what doesn’t. He really loves people talking about Jesus and how Jesus affects every part of our lives.

Valerie Ting Valerie is enjoying learning to be a high school teacher at Melbourne Uni. Other things she enjoys are good conversations, beauty, playing 500, reading, meals with friends, craft and all things fun!

Alison Laird Alison is a final year Arts student at Sydney University where she is studying Music and English literature. She became a Christian when she was in year eight. She spends most of her spare time listening to music.

Natasha GodfreyNatasha Godfrey works with the Christian Union at Melbourne Uni. She has a particular interest in sharing the good news about Jesus with Muslims and Jews on campus. She’s married to Andrew and they attend St Jude’s church in Carlton.

Geoff Lin Geoff Lin is a staffworker with EU North Terrace (Adelaide Uni, UniSA City East/City West).

Richard More Richard is the AFES Victorian Missions Mobiliser. This involves supporting staff in raising awareness of overseas mission on Victorian campuses, and then working to train and equip the growing number of graduates and students who are in the process of considering long-term overseas mission. He is married to Anita and has twin sons, Aaron and Nathan.

David Moore Dave is married to Julie and they have 3 kids (Jake 4, Mitch 2, Tesla 1 mth). He is studying at Moore College in 3rd year. Though a self described ‘computer nerd’, Dave loves playing tackles with his boys, watching movies with Julie, and dreaming about the new heavens and the new earth.

Rory Shiner Rory works with students at UWA as part of the UWA Christian Union. He is married to Susan and they have one son, Miles, and another due in late December.

Mark Thompson Mark is married to Kathryn and has four young daughters. In a past life he was a student at Macquarie University and later at a university in the UK. He now lectures theology at Moore College in Sydney where he has been on the staff since 1991.

Dr Peter Adam Peter is the Principal of Ridley College, Melbourne, where he leads the College, lectures in theology, mentors students, and preaches in Chapel. Peter was trained for the ministry at Ridley, and ordained in Melbourne. He has studied in England and lectured at St John’s College, Durham, and was minister of St Jude’s Carlton in Melbourne for 20 years. He enjoys reading history and fiction, playing the piano, and being walked by his dog George.

Support AFES through prayer! Join Prayernet, our monthly email prayer resource. It is chock full of prayer points from various AFES groups, informs you of our specific prayer needs and keeps you up to date with what is happening around the country.

Prayernet is sent out at the beginning of each month as a PDF. To join the mailing list, please email

[email protected]

• Four cappuccinos

• A week’s worth of newspapers

• A movie ticket (if you’re lucky)

• Partnership with an AFES staffworker

• Support for Christian student work in Slovenia

• Furthering the AFES work on your campus

AFES is funded entirely by people like you, people with a passion to see Christ proclaimed on Australian university campuses.

You can support particular projects like our partnership with IFES in Slovenia. You can partner a particular AFES staffworker or campus group. You can give regularly or make a one-off donation. However you choose to do it, your support will enable AFES to continue this vital work throughout Australia.

What could you get for $10 a month?

Think you can spare at least $10 a month? Go to www.afes.org.au/support.html to make an online credit card donation

or give the National Office a call on 02 9697 0313.

ON

liNE G

iviNG

NO

w AvAilAblE!



Jesus Says Go

Engaging with Islam DVDEngaging with islam: A training course for Christians.DVD $25.00

Workbook $7.00 including postage

To order phone the AFES National Office on 02 9697 0313 or email [email protected]

Available from AFES

RRP $16.95

Get it today for the special price of $15.00 including postage

2 great resources!feed your ears for free!

mp3 downloads

Download great talks from leading Christian speakers, including Phillip Jensen, Rob Forsyth, Ray Galea and many more. It’s an ever-growing library of NTE, expo and MYC talks, and in under a year, more than 25,500 talks have been downloaded by users in 30 countries.

Hear what all the fuss is about at http://afes.causeway-online.info/repository/afes/default.htm

last things first

2-10 December 2006 at ANU, CanberraSpeakers: Phillip Jensen on eschatology • Lindsay Brown (IFES) on Philippians

Register online at www.afes.org.au/nte.html

AFES National Training Event 2006What does God have in mind for the future?

What does that have to do with me?

the cross - welcome · the person of jesus christ and the work he came to do. we know what god is...

Documents