Mugabe must go

It's been quite a while since I have talked about Mugabe. Every day he makes me sicker.

Dear Lord, please bring an end to this evil man's regime and do it soon, any way that you must.

Where to start? Thousands are dying daily from cholera now. Eighty percent of the country are in abject poverty. The only people who have any money are his army. Just today he has issued the "trillion dollar banknote" series. If you think that sounds crazy, it was just last week that the billion dollar bank not series was released, but those notes have already lost value.

Recently Mugabe told a gathering of African leaders that he would never give up Zimbabwe, and that he "owns it". We have long suspected that he believes that, but to hear it is the absolute pits. I guess the west is standing by wanting African leaders to do something about him. South Africa have dropped the ball. Jacob Zuma is implicitly to blame. Desmond Tutu has even admitted that South Africa have lost international credibility for doing nothing.

I didn't write on this topic during the last Zimbabwe election, because I hoped beyond hope that Mugabe would step down, but he did not. The power sharing arrangement has been a farce.

I really don't want to write about this again until he is gone, and I pray that is very soon.

Thank you Matty... and goodbye

I said I would be happy when Matthew Hayden retired. Relieved is a more accurate word. I thoroughly enjoyed his career. His career was a brilliant one. It would be fair to say that he was in the top 3 batsmen for Australia over the last two decades along with Ricky Ponting and Steve Waugh. That's a fair call, considering he never captained Australia. So no hard feelings Matty, thanks for all the good times, and thanks for stepping aside to give the young blokes a chance.

Speaking of young blokes the question now falls as to who should fill Hayden's shoes. An obvious choice would be Phil Jaques at 29, going on 30, although that's not very young, but has been the common age of selection for the test side in the recent era. Jaques was the opener who replaced Langer when he retired. He has played 11 test matches for 902 runs with an average of 47 and a high score of 150. These are very dependable figures. Jaques is currently out on injury and has not played much cricket this season.

Katich has played well in recent times and should happily keep his spot. He is 33 now, and probably only has 3 years left in him. But this may be perfect timing for David Warner who will then be 25 to replace him.

Phil Hughes is the exciting option in my estimation. At 20 years of age, he has already played 16 matches for NSW at shield level, with a very handy average of 53.48. Everyone knows that Sheffield Shield cricket in Australia is serious stuff, so his average should count for something. I wonder if the Australian selectors will take a risk and go for youth. I hope they do, but my bet is they will choose Jaques.

There are exciting days ahead for Australian cricket, if the right choices are made.

David Warner than Shane?

Wow, I really enjoyed myself at the MCG last night. I think the award should be changed from "player of the match" to "entertainer of the match." Warner's innings was so entertaining last night, that I have been completely won over to the Twenty20 concept. I am still a test purist at heart, but I have to say that Twenty 20 is ready to take on the world with games last night, that was frankly far more entertaining than any baseball match. Look out America!

I really enjoyed watching an Australian team with so many young players in it. It was right of the selectors to take some risks with their choices. I actually think that the selectors do not yet believe that Twenty 20 cricket counts, and are therefore happy to take risks. For the time being this is good for Australian cricket. It gives young players a chance to show their stuff.

David Warner is 22 years old. He has only plated a handful of games at Twenty 20 and List A level for NSW, but never a first class game. It's obvious that it is too early for him to play in the test side for the simple reason that he has no Shield first class experience. But it's still a shame that he has none, because he would be an exciting opener at test level. Maybe in a couple years time.

Apparently David Warner has already been picked up in the Indian Premier League by the Delhi Devils. This does pose an interesting question. Are we seeing the first of a new generation to specialise in Twenty 20, and never to play test cricket. I certainly hope not, but we will have to see which way the revolution goes.

Last night's Australian team had two test players in it. Ricky Ponting and Michael Hussey both looked like they needn't be there last night. Both were ineffectual with the bat, although Hussey did take a brilliant catch. Shaun Tait has played tests before. It was good to see him warm up again. It was extremely entertaining to see him knock AB De Villiers over at 156 kph and force a hit wicket.

For my brain, I still like to think of the future of the test team. The third test in Sydney and the Twenty 20 last night both give a lot of food for thought. Doug Bollinger and Andrew Mac Donald both had good debuts in Sydney. Peter Siddle is staking his claim for a spot in the side. David Warner has also staked his claim, but perhaps not for a year or two. My only two large disappointments now surround the omission of Jason Krejza and the inclusion of Matthew Hayden. Hayden, I have already talked about. Krejza had a fantastic debut with 12 wickets in India. He was then bowled on the flattest of wickets in Perth, and subsequently left out of the team. He needs to be brought back as quickly as possible. With Johnson, Siddle, Bollinger, Hilfenhaus and Jason Krejza the future of Australian bowling looks bright.

With David Warner's performance last night, the future of Twenty 20 looks hot, and the future of Aussie cricket looks bright too. Is he Warner than Warne?

Next time.... when is Australia getting a Twenty 20 Premier League.

Time to go Matty (Hayden)

I remember many years back watching Matthew Hayden with a friend of mine on Boxing Day. Australia was playing the West Indies. It was early in Hayden's career. I was an advocate of his position in the test side. My mate argued incessantly that Hayden should not be in the team. To prove my mate's point Matty Hayden went on to leave a ball that clean bowled him. It was an embarrassing dismissal for Hayden and I had egg on my face for sticking up for him. Nevertheless I argued that he should be in the test side. Over all I have been the correct judge as Hayden has had a wonderful career. He has been a highly dependable player. 8625 runs at 50.37 with 30 centuries is solid.

We are thankful for the player that Hayden has been, but it is time for him to retire. Over the last 6 test matches he has averaged 22 runs. His failures at the crease have been all too consistent this Summer. The icing on the cake was when he dropped Ntini at second slip in the third test in Sydney, which would have won the match. The catch was simple and straight forward, yet his head was just not in the zone.

Over the last two years Shane Warne, Glen Mc Grath, Damien Martyn, Justin Langer and Adam Gilchrist have all retired from the Australian team. As each player has retired the public have been sad to see them go. They all left on a high note. Many times people have wished that Shane Warne would come back to the side. He has happily refused knowing that his legend will be remembered.

If Matthew Hayden does not retire soon then nobody will miss him when he is gone. In fact I will be happy when he is gone, and I have always spoken up for him during his career. I wish he would know when his time has come. He now seems out of place in the side. It seems that we have a new team now of younger players who are capable of winning. It is time to build the next generation test side and sadly Hayden is now just getting in the way.

I have no gift to bring...

It's Christmas time. The most wonderful time of the year. That might not always be true all the time for people. But to remember and celebrate Jesus' birth every year is a wonderful thing. I have reflected on what this means many times, and some of the most special times that God has spoken to me have actually been at Christmas.

What does it mean that Jesus was incarnate amongst us? Obviously this is a big question, and I'm not going to tackle this one much today, except to say that it is the biggest gift ever given. For Jesus to leave his glory behind in heaven was a huge gift. For him to lay down his life later on was an indescribable gift.

I heard a message at a Christmas Eve service today. The preacher picked up on the theme of the modern carol "The Little Drummer Boy."

(I'll leave most of the pa rum pum pums out).

Come they told me, a new born King to see,
Our finest gifts we bring, to lay before the King,
So to honor him when we come

Little baby, I am a poor boy too
I have no gift to bring, that's fit to give the King
Shall I play for you on my drum?

Mary nodded, the ox and lamb kept time,
I played my drum for him,
I played my best for him,
Then he smiled at me, pa rum pum pum pum
Me and my drum

I must confess I have always loved this song, partly because it lends itself to many great variations from a multitude of musicians, but most of all because of its quintessential simplicity. I have no gift to bring..... I played my best for him.

So the question comes to me. What do I have to give my King Jesus as a gift, this Christmas time, every Christmas time? I could come up with a simple answer and say, I will give him my life. And yes, this is what I want to do. I also know that it is a gift that pleases God. But I also know that my life is full of rubbish. I'm a sinner. I make so many mistakes. I do want to make a difference. I do want Siberian peoples to know about Jesus and I sincerely hope that I play my part in that cause.

Let me go back many years. For a long time I have known that I wanted to go to Siberia, since I was 15. The journey took many twists and turns, and is even still continuing. When I was 21 I took my first trip outside of the country on a short term mission to South Africa. We actually arrived the day before Christmas. The few days after Christmas there was virtually nothing for us to do. Here I was, young, passionate and intense, going on a mission trip as part of the path of obedience to God. When I got to the start of that mission trip I was all keyed up to get out there and share the gospel. Everything fell flat on its face and I was trapped on this compound with my hands metaphorically tied. It felt so dark, black and lonely. At that stage of my life that mission trip was a litmus test for me. A test to see if I would serve God with my life as a missionary. It felt hopeless, and impossible. I didn't know where things were going. In that moment things felt the darkest they had ever in my life. But in that moment I cried out to God. I told him that yes I wanted to serve him. I wanted to give him my gift. I told him that I would reapply with my resume for the job- and confessed that all I could offer him was a blank piece of paper. "But I'll apply anyway Lord, this is all I have to offer..... nothing.... myself."

Then he smiled at me. Yes, he would receive this gift.

As I reflect on this now, I once again realise, that as far as I have come in the Siberian journey it is only because God has taken me that far in the journey. The times when I have seen him work the most have been the times when I was simply in the right place at the right time and was obedient. I was the blank page on those occasions and God filled in all of the gap.

I want to give him my life again. I want to give him a special gift this Christmas time. I won't pretend to offer a page of my own, but I will offer up the page that he has been writing on and ask of my Lord that he would complete this good work he has begun in me. I'm still a sinner and I still make lots of mistakes. But I'll play my best for Christ.

And he smiles at me.....

May he smile at you too this Christmas time.

Societal sin- let's forgive Ben Cousins

On many occasions I have felt that Australian society is extremely lacking in grace. It has become legalistic and condemnatory. Perhaps I am just noticing more the things that have always been here, and just see them as I come back to the country.

Every time I return to Australia, one of the things that bugs me the most is the campaign to cut down the road toll. This campaign has been going on for many years now. Somehow the police and the government are convinced that they will cut out road deaths altogether. The latest campaign particularly bugs me, "We'll catch you before someone gets hurt!" Who are these police, do they think they are God, that they can somehow stop every speeding motorist out there? Either this message implies that they will actually catch all of the dangerous drivers, or that every driver who speeds a little is actually dangerous.

The current speed limit on the Monash Freeway is 80 km/h. This is because the lanes are narrower due to roadworks. I do my best to stick to the speed limit while 90% of the traffic zips past me at 90 or 100. I find it awfully frustrating, and remark to myself how hypocritical the police are that they are allowing thousands of murderers to stay on the road. (Murderers from their own implication that is.) In reality most of these drivers are not causing much risk.

The other day we were behind a police car that pulled a car over. We were sticking at the speed limit of 60 km/h. It appeared that the police car was too, and the car in front. The driver did not appear to be speeding, but was likely driving at the criminal speed of 63 km/h. The police pulled the driver over, and likely brought in more revenue (which I am sure is their real bottom line). This fits with their policy of fining all drivers who drive 3 or more kilometres over the speed limit. I sure feel safe, now that they caught that maniac before he hurt someone.

For all their pride, there is nothing that the police can do to catch the really dangerous drivers. At least one recent tragedy had the driver doing speeds of above 170 km/h. No amount of threatening billboards or speed cameras were going to catch that driver, who actually did become a murderer. Patrol cars can do some good in stopping serious speeders and taking away their licenses, but perhaps that may still not stop some.

All this to point out that condemning the public when they drive a few clicks over is an adverse form of legalism and is not helping the situation at all.

Speeding is now officially a societal SIN.

But really it is not the fault of the police. Society actually wants these strict measures. On at least a few occasions I have spoken to people who defend the drachonian measures in Australian society today. Let's move on to another of my pet peaves, the ostracism of smokers in our society. A recent news report boasted that the Quit campaign over the last two plus decades has seen the reduction in Australian smokers from 33% to 19% of the population. This campaign has been going on for over two decades now. So in many ways that reduction is not a very good victory. If the campaign was going to succeed there would be no smokers left in society. Even though the percentage has been decreased, the actual number of smokers has not been dented that much, as the population of Australia has risen from 14 million to 21 million in that time.

Smokers are seen as the number one evil in Australian society. They are a drain on the health system, or so we are told. But how much money has been spent on the Quit campaign over the years? How much tax have the smokers paid over the years themselves? I'd love to see a study done on the money involved. It would be my guess that when a smoker needs an operation for lung cancer, that they have more than paid for it with their taxes by the time they arrive in the hospital.

This approach from government has seen the policy extended to the furthest reaches of society. Smokers can no longer find a pub or club to hang out in. There is no such thing as social smoking any more. Office workers are condemned to hide underground in some dark and damp corner of a car park, they are not even allowed to smoke out the front of the office building because it would make the company look dirty.

This is not to say that smoking is smart or healthy. But it seriously irritates me to see that condemnation handed down upon smokers.

Smoking is no longer just a societal SIN, it is now also a social SIN.

Let's take the fight to Ben Cousins. Ben Cousins has been on a long and difficult journey in his battle with narcotic drugs. I'm not making excuses for his decisions, but I do have compassion for him. I am very happy for him that he has been drafted by the Richmond footy club. I'm happy for a few reasons. I think it's great that he has a second chance. The testing regime that he will be under will help him stay accountable, and give him the best chance to turn his life around. I am impressed that Richmond took him when no other club would. As a Richmond supporter I am proud of my club for going against the flow. Fourteen of the fifteen other clubs opposed Richmond's moves to draft Ben Cousins. I hope God blesses Richmond for showing compassion where no one else would. (Of course the cynic in me says, that Richmond was just taking their typical approach of selecting a proven player instead of youth. I hope that's not the case, and I don't think it is here.)

The media doesn't like a good news story. The same day that Ben Cousins trained with Richmond for the first time, the media were on his case because he has had past associations with an underworld figure who has recently been arrested. The media doesn't want to give him a second chance. I fear that much of society does not either, as indicated by 14 of 16 AFL clubs.

Jesus had some challenging things to say about sin and it's affects on us. He told people that when they judge others they should first examine themselves. He is quoted as saying, "Before you remove the speck from someone else's eye, remove the plank from your own." All of society should examine themselves a little more, instead of taking such "self righteous" attitudes with speeding drivers, smokers and failed AFL footballers.

Am I a thief or a good shepherd?

When we were living in Siberia, a friend pointed out that it is important when preaching the gospel to an indigenous people to go through the "door" instead of a window. This basically means that it is essential to learn the culture and the language of the people and to find the cultural keys.


Then today I came across these words from Jesus, "I tell you the truth, the man who does not enter the sheep pen by the gate, but climbs in by some other way, is a thief and a robber." It occurred to me that many people who do not respect the culture of the people they are trying to reach actually are thieves in the eyes of the receiving culture. It is often the complaint of Siberian people that they are not interested in Jesus because he is the "Russian god." Anyone who comes preaching Jesus to them without respecting their culture and taking the time to understand them is most definitely seen as a thief. I certainly don't want to be a thief.


Jesus goes on to say, "they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice". It's pretty plain to see that time is needed for people to learn the voice of the messenger. When the voice is heard, understood and trusted then this is a like the shepherd entering in through the gate.

I hope you will take the time to be a friendly shepherd rather than a thief when sharing the gospel with people.

Shaking the world view

Over the last couple years I have been learning in practice, what I knew in theory. That is that for people to receive the gospel their word view needs to be shaken. I particularly enjoyed the argument of people from One Story, that it is within the imagination of a story that people's world views are challenged. In fact the very same thing happened for C.S Lewis. In his biography he retells how it was in the realm of imagination and stories that he allowed himself to imagine that God was real.

I have recently been sharing with people an experience from Tuva where people we spent time with there had their world view challenged by our presence and the ensuing battle between angels and demons camped about our tent when we camped together with them. They fully expected to face punishment from the evil spirits after we upset the balance. When they did not face the repercussions of the evil spirits it challenged their world view.

If this is what is necessary to challenge people with the gospel in non western cultures, shouldn't it also be necessary in western cultures? To challenge a western thinker with the gospel of Jesus, the dominant paradigm must first be tackled. What is the dominant paradigm of the western person? I would love to hear your thoughts on this topic. There are a few dominant paradigms. One of them is most definitely that of consumerism. It seems that our whole lives in the west revolve around what we consume, than what we produce. And it is not uncommon that people will go on shopping sprees for the sake of entertainment. This paradigm is centred in "what can I take?" instead of "what can I give?"

Churches have become consumeristic too. People spend time in church wanting to be entertained, to make friends, to feel good, i.e to receive. Where as the foremost reason we should go to church is to worship God.

So my task over the next 18 months, while I live in a western country will be to undermine the western world view of consumerism and perhaps other paradigms as well.

The spirituality of music

My writing of late has been a little scarce, I will try to get back into it again.

I have some seed thoughts about music. Simply put, the voice is the most basic and primitive form of music. It is when the voice is stretched and abnormal frequencies are made that the building blocks of music are created. I have no doubt that the most ancient and primitive forms of music were voice only. Rhythm would have followed next, followed by impromptu percussion. But already in the primitive growth of music, percussion and rhythm were accompaniment for singing.

Later on, many discoveries would have been made that created various frequencies, not unlike singing. I wonder then if early instrumentation was not then a mimicry of singing. The development of instrumentation is a means of embellishing the environment for the voice.

True, much music is now completely absent of voice altogether. But in many ways this music is searching for deep gutteral ways to articulate what words fall short of doing. Words can be mistakingly seen as synonymous with voice, but they merely overlap.

Instrumentation is a wonderful thing and I enjoy it. It enables a musician to express themself, in the security of the "other" without necessarily shining a spotlight on the soul. But I find the voice the most naked and vulnerable of musical expressions, one that can never be truly matched by a musical instrument.

The voice expresses the deepest yearnings of the soul. We all have a voice, and whether we admit it or not, we can all sing (even if we do not want others to hear us!). When we sing out loud we open our soul up to breathe and we can call out to the deep. When we direct our singing towards the Creator God, it can become the purest of prayers, especially if we don't know the words, but simply sing.

Give it a try, open your mouth and sing out loud to your Creator. He just might answer you.

Can Christians be demonically attacked or influenced?

This is a bit of a hot topic between various Christian circles. Some charismatic believers will tell you that a Christian can actually be demon possessed. Others will tell you that a believer can not possibly have a demon live within them because the Holy Spirit is already living within them. Often the verse "Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?" (2 Cor 6:14) is cited as evidence of this. It is important when reading scripture to always take the whole passage into account. In full the scripture reads:

14Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15What harmony is there between Christ and Belial[b]? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? 16What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."[c]
17"Therefore come out from them
and be separate, says the Lord.
Touch no unclean thing,
and I will receive you."[d]
18"I will be a Father to you,
and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty."

The scripture is exhorting the believing person to not marry the unbelieving person. This is the strictest sense of the meaning "to be yoked together". It is referring to sexual union, and is therefore an exhortation to not sleep with a temple prositute.

This does not necessarily mean that a believing person may not have been opened up to demonic influence in their life. In the old testament law in the book of Deuteronomy (chapter 5) the Lord teachers his followers to not worship idols and false gods. The consequences of such actions bring a curse upon someone's life. If this curse is not broken then it will carry on to the third and fourth generations (verse 9). The good news though, is that Jesus can break the curse and then his blessing carries on for a "thousand generations" (verse 10).

People who come from animist backgrounds have been highly exposed to demonic influences. An animist culture has much idol and demon worship. This opens individuals and families up to demonic influence and possession. The demons have actually been given permission into these peoples lives. This is known as spiritual bondage. It is these bondages that often keep people from coming to know the truth of Jesus. But even when people do come to believe in Jesus, there is much healing to go through. A person can make a choice to believe and invite the Holy Spirit into their life. But this does not mean that the demon will automatically leave a person's life. The demon needs to be told to leave, since it was first given permission. The Holy Spirit enters someone's life when given permission. In fact as the Holy Spirit is gentle, He will not force any deeper into a person's life than the permission given. The Holy Spirit will draw back when grieved. A demon on the other hand will cling on very tightly when first given any permission, a little like "given an inch, a mile is taken".

When a person gives their life to Jesus, they are then in a position to command demons to leave, in the name of Jesus. Before this step, they do not even have the power to tell a demon to leave. So a demon will not leave someone unless commanded to do so in Jesus name. It may be possible to command a demon to leave a non-believer, but unless that person then believes, the demon will bring even more back.

Last year I met a Siberian pastor, from the Eveny people group. He came from an animist background and knows a lot of which he speaks, from personal experience. He is from a Baptist church. He has a lot of believers come to him for prayer to be set free from demons. Other Baptists disagree with him because it is not part of their doctrine. But this pastor has prayed with many believers for deliverance from demons within their life. The demons are commanded in the name of Jesus to leave the person's life. Their permission is revoked.

So it is possible that someone may have brought demons with them from their past life before they believed. But is it possible for a person who is already a believer to allow a demon into their life? Well not unwittingly, I would say. A person who is a believer has the Holy Spirit, and should be able to listen to the Holy Spirit, and therefore not partake in activities that are occultic, demonic etc. But sadly today there are so many noises in a person's life, that we rarely take the time to slow down and just listen to God. Therefore many believers do not know the voice of God very well, or choose not to listen when the Holy Spirit warns that something is sinful.

I recently became aware of a young girl, who is a believer but had been taking part in Zen Buddhist meditation. It was her misunderstanding, that Zen is not a religious practice. To know whether this is true or not it is necessary to understand what Zen meditation is. In a book called "Zen for Christians" the following is laid out:

"Zen for Christians does not mean Zen adapted for Christians in the way that yoga for pregancy means yoga adapted for pregnant women. The Zen in this book is just plain Zen, but the presentation of Zen in this book is especially for Christians..... Zen is a way of liberation from suffering- both the suffering we experience ourselves and the suffering we cause others. It is a practical and experiential tradition, centred in a form of meditation..."

"Zen is a way of selflessness, in two senses of the word. First, Zen is a way of directly experiencing what Buddhism calls "no-self" - realizing the distinction between "me" and "not me" ..."

It is clear that Zen meditation is simply not a "non-religious" practice. The idea behind Zen meditation is for the meditator to "empty" themself of all consciousness, to become aware that they are really nothing. The goal is to reunite with the universal consciousness, to reach enlightenment or "nirvana" as the Buddha (Suddarthu Gautuma- a mere man) supposedly did. The goal of Zen is to detach oneself from suffering. However Jesus teaches us to go through suffering. And we are made in God's image. Therefore Christian meditation is to realise that we are made in God's image. Zen meditation is the opposite of this. In deed in a person's involvement in Zen meditation they are opening themself up to demonic influence, giving a demon permission in their life. It is my clear hope and prayer that this girl will seek prayer deliverance ministry after opening herself up in such a way. If she does not, she will face much trouble in life.

At the start of Jesus' ministry he went around all of the Galilean countryside casting demons out from peoples' lives. He was preparing the ground for the word to be preached later on. Demons produce barriers to people listening to the gospel. In any place of ministry demons need to be bound and cast out before any real success will follow. Is it any wonder that many churches in the west do not grow, when we allow so many demonic influences into our midst?

Jesus would rather that we were hot or cold, but not lukewarm in our love for him. It is when we are lukewarm that we compromise and allow lies into our midst. Let's find a passion for Jesus and for holiness, cast out the demons from our midst and invite the Holy Spirit to minister in our communities.