Harvest Without Limitation

"Go ye into all the world..." Jesus said
"...and preach the Gospel to every nation"

The Apostles heeded His Word
And went without hesitation

But until the Holy Ghost was given
The upper room remained their station

"Wait for the Promise", Jesus had told them
They were filled with anticipation

In one place for ten days they waited
All in good relation

With the women and Mary and His brothers
They continued in prayer for the duration

Matthias along with the eleven
As an Apostle received his registration

For one-hundred-and-twenty people
It was a time of preparation

Then when the Day of Pentecost was fully come
The room was shaken with vibration

They all began to speak with other tongues
As the Spirit gave them dictation

When this was noised abroad
The city was filled with consternation

"How do we hear every man speaking our language?
Is this mere intoxication?"

"These are not drunk as ye suppose"
Peter stood and gave his quotation

"This is that which was spoken by Joel"
The empowerment for the ministration

"What must we do?"
The people asked with desperation

"Repent and be baptized, and you'll receive the Spirit too
For the Promise is for you and your children to every generation"

In that way, in one day
Three-thousand became the Church's population!

And today in contemporary society
We are still in the same situation

It's not by might, nor by power
Nor by human orchestration

It's by the Spirit
When He comes in manifestation...

...that we shall attract the harvest
without limitation

It's by letting go
Of our reputation...

...allowing rather
The Spirit's impartation...

...that we shall enjoy
the greater celebration

Biblical Wealth Creation Strategy

It seems some believers, including prosperity preachers, were affected by the current financial crisis. But sometimes a lot of our modern wealth-creation strategies are different to the Bible's value-system, and we might not even know it. If we return to the Bible's definition of prosperity, we might remain unaffected by such crises.

For example, Moses' system of Law forbad charging interest within the economy, except to non-citizens. If we did that in our modern economies, inflation would be a thing of the past. But a lot of modern wealth-creation strategies actually depend on earning interest.

In Moses' economy without interest, it would have been unlikely to use real estate as a wealth-creation strategy - because the economy would have remained stable. In our modern economies, however, we actually hope for instability in the economy to force prices up so we can profit by selling the house to some less fortunate buyer for more than we paid for it even though we haven't made any improvements to the property.

Morally, we ought to desire stability in the economy. Ideally we ought not to seek a wealth-creation strategy that somehow disadvantages our neighbour in comparison to how much we are advantaged. We ought to seek mutual profit.

If we've made capital improvement to a property, and those improvements are reflected in the new price of our house - then that's fair enough. But to sell the same house without improvements for more than we paid for it is only possible in an unstable environment and it means the buyer is getting less house for his money than you did. Is that 'walking in love'?

I'm not saying we shouldn't be involved in such strategies while that's the way our system works. But I think the Bible's value-system is different and we can benefit by rediscovering it and returning to it.

In a future post I'll go into more detail about Biblical wealth-creation strategies.

God's Social Welfare System

God gave us, in His Word, a blueprint for a social welfare system which doesn't cost society anything - a system which is more effective and compassionate towards the poor and yet doesn't tax the wealthy in order to redistribute their wealth to the poor.

In the system of Law which God gave to Israel through Moses, there weren't any unemployment benefits and there weren't any prisons.

But to what extent is it legitmate to apply Moses' Law to modern civil society?

Every point of Moses' Law can be summarized in one word - love. One purpose of Moses' Law was to show Israel how to apply the principle of love in all kinds of relationships: in their relationships with God, parents, spouse, children, employers/employees, the poor, criminals, foreigners and other nations.

In the New Testament, we also are commanded to love. We express our love - either for God or for our neighbour - in slightly different ways to how they expressed their love under the Old Covenant.

For example, in the Old Testament, if a person loved God, he could voluntarily sacrifice an offering on the altar; whereas in the New Testament, we show our love for God by bringing the sacrifice of praise, the fruit of our lips offering thanks to God. The expression is different, but the underlying principle is the same. The whole point is love.

So, when it comes to things like a national social welfare system or a national criminal justice system - we can learn from the way Moses applied the principle of love to such matters, since we are also under the commandment of love - even though we may not apply it in exactly the same way.

The principle of love states that "Love worketh no ill toward his neighbour". Moses wrote points of Law which taught Israelites how to avoid harming their neighbours - whether their neighbour was their wife, child, employer, employee, a poor person, the victim or perpetrator of crime, or a foreign resident.

Part of working no ill towards your neighbour is to avoid inflicting a cost on your neighbour. You find it an ill if someone inflicts a cost on you, don't you? Of course you do. We all do.

Therefore an important observation about Moses' handling of social welfare and criminal justice is that no segment of society was disadvantaged in order to advantage another segment.

For example, in dealing with the poor, Moses never gave them a system which cost society in any way; and in dealing with criminals, Moses never gave them a system which cost society in any way. To legislate otherwise, would have been tantamount to working ill towards one's neighbour.

Compare that with modern social welfare or social justice systems which cost society a significant percentage of their GDP. In Australia, 22.5% of our GDP is spent on welfare. That's $25,370 per capita. That means, if you are a family of five, and if we were somehow able to appropriately apply Moses' social welfare system in Australia, you could have an extra $126,850 in your pocket every year.

That's not including the cost of our modern prison system. In the United States, the average cost of incarceration per prisoner in 2005 was $23,876. That amounts to an estimated cost of $60billion per year on corrections.

Whereas Moses' criminal justice system included principles which made sure the cost to society was zero. Moses' system inflicted no cost on society - it worked no ill towards one's neighbour - whereas our system does, at great cost.

Any 'social justice' system which inflicts any cost on any particular segment of society for the benefit of another segment of society is not really 'justice' at all - and it is inconsistent with the commandment of love because love worketh no ill toward his neighbour.

There is a way in which we can appropriately apply Moses' handling of social welfare and criminal justice in a way which fulfills the commandment of love - in a way which inflicts no cost at all on society.

In a future post I'll point-out some details of Moses' handling of social welfare and criminal justice, and share some thoughts on how legislators could apply it to modern society.

It's a sytem which benefits everyone - the unemployed, the employed, the employer - each at the same time.

What Defines a Meeting as "Decently and In Order" (I Cor.14:40)?

Many believers have been hindered from embracing Holy Spirit meetings (such as the meeting viewable here) because they've been taught that it is "confusion" and that it is not "decently and in order".

But what is really meant by "confusion" and "decently and in order" (I Cor. 14:33,40)? I think these may be two of the most commonly misunderstood verses in the Epistles. Yes, God is not the author of confusion; and all things must be done decently and in order - but how should we define "confusion" and "decently and in order"? The Bible's definition might not be the same as ours.

For example, remember in Acts chapter two, how the Holy Spirit enabled 120 people to speak with tongues out loud at the same time - it caused a whole multitude to feel confounded and to think they must have been drunk. If that happens in a church service today, should we define it as "confusion" and not "decently and in order"?

In Acts 10:44-48 the Holy Spirit fell on a congregation, interrupting Peter's sermon while he was still preaching - and the whole congregation began to speak with tongues out loud. If this happens today during a sermon in our church, should we decry it as "confusion" and not "decently and in order"?

At Ephesus the Holy Ghost came upon about twelve people and they spoke with tongues and prophesied (Acts 19:6,7). When we hear of the same thing happening today - of twelve or more people speaking with tongues in a meeting at the same time and prophesying - should we label it as "confusion" and not "decently and in order"?

In each of the above situations there were many people speaking with tongues publicly without an interpreter; and it even caused people to feel confounded and to think they were drunk, and yet notice - the Apostles were okay with it.

So, what did Paul mean when he said to "let all things be done decently and in order"? Obviously, Paul could not have been against a scenario where 120 people might speak with tongues out loud all at the same time; and he could not have been against a scenario where a sermon might be interrupted when an entire congregation suddenly begins to speak witb tongues out loud; and he could not have been against a scenario where about twelve people might speak with tongues and prophesy out loud publicly - or else he would have been contradicting the Scriptures and the work of the Holy Spirit.

So, what was happening at Corinth that Paul sought to correct? Well, the text explains it in Paul's own words. The Corinthians were thinking that having different gifts meant they had different spirits (I Cor.12:1-11); and that different gifts made them spiritually different from one another (vv 12-14); and that having different gifts made them better than one another (vv 15-31). Consequently, they had become unloving, impatient, envious, proud, self-promoting, badly behaved, irritable, annoyed with each other, irrationally behaved and unnecessarily noisy in their expressions of their spiritual gifts without considering the need to edify one another during their gatherings (I Cor.13).

So doctrinally, there was some "confusion" which Paul needed to correct: he needed to remind them that despite having differing spiritual gifts, there is still only one Lord, one faith, one baptism; and as far as their attitudes and motives go, Paul needed to remind them not to be childish and immature, but to consider what is appropriate behaviour to the circumstances, and to think of one another's benefit instead of one's own, and to have some common sense.

Also, Paul was discussing the function of the congregation during regular church-services, not about extraordinary occassions when from time-to-time the Holy Spirit gets poured out in a special way. Meetings like Acts 2, Acts 10 and Acts 19 didn't happen everytime the disciples gathered together - it happened that way when a congregation was first baptized with the Holy Spirit and then also from time-to-time again in the future (Acts 13:52) - but not necessarily every meeting.

But what was happening at Corinth is that too many individuals, with wrong motives, were wanting to stand up and hold the floor, one after the other, Sunday after Sunday, and address the the congregation, expecting the attention of the whole congregation, and speaking with an unknown tongue, when no-one could understand them. Of course that was pointless, which any sensible person, even an unbeliever, should know.

But that didn't mean there weren't situations in which it was entirely appropriate that everyone spoke with tongues publicly without an interpreter - even in the Bible. In Acts 2, 10 and 19, the people weren't seeking attention, they weren't addressing the congregation - they were speaking to God.

Here is an illustration about different things being appropriate in different situations. Imagine 65,718 people in a football stadium during the World Cup. Everyone shouts at the same time. Everyone carries on a conversation with his friends sitting beside him. Everyone in the stadium has his own culture and language - and it's okay that everyone is talking and shouting his own language and it isn't necessary that everyone understands everything that everyone else in the stadium is saying. However, it would be pointless if, one-by-one, individuals wanted to stand up, hold the microphone, address the whole stadium in his own language, and expect everyone to listen even though many in the crowd wouldn't understand. That wouldn't be appropriate to the circumstances - it would be childish and immature. And if people persisted in doing so, you'd question their mental health.

That is the type of occurrence Paul was correcting. He wasn't saying there can't be times when the Holy Spirit gets poured out on a congregation in a special way when everyone might begin to speak with tongues out loud at the same time without the need for an interpreter and to prophesy (otherwise, Paul would have been contradicting his own meeting at Ephesus in Acts 19). What Paul was talking about, rather, was regular, every Sunday meetings, where individuals were behaving in a non-sensical way which even unbelievers would think was useless.

When Paul said unbelievers would think they were mad, it wasn't because of the fact of speaking with tongues - Paul said tongues are a sign to unbelievers. There are circumstances in which any sensible person knows - even unbelievers - that it's quite okay for many people to be speaking in different languages at the same time - such as spectators in a stadium during an international football match, or believers during group-prayer or during an outpouring of the Holy Spirit. That doesn't mean a group of people are mad.

What anyone will think is crazy, however, is if grown adults are standing up, holding the floor, going on and on in a different language, expecting people's attention, even though no-one understands them - and thinking that's beneficial. Anyone with a bit of common sense knows that's pointless.

But when a whole church gets filled with the Spirit for the first time and all begin to speak with tongues - no individual is expecting the congregation to give him their undivided attention; no-one is addressing the congregation. They are all speaking to God, as in Acts 2, 10 & 19. That's entirely Scriptural and okay - and it's not what Paul was addressing.

The linked video was not one of the church's regular Sunday morning services. It was a season of special revival in the church. Many were getting filled with the Spirit for the first time. The church did not experience this type of outpouring every Sunday. It was an extraordinary season, like Acts 2, 10 and 19. In the video, no-one was using the gift of tongues in the manner which Paul was correcting in I Corinthians. Rather, they were speaking with tongues in a way that was consistent with Acts 2, 10 & 19. They were speaking not to the congregation, but to God. Yes, it caused some people to feel "confounded" and others to wonder whether they might be drunk. But those people ended-up hearing the Gospel and getting saved!

So it's important to compare Scripture with Scripture, and gain a balanced understanding of what really defines a meeting as "decently and in order". Every sensible person knows it doesn't serve any purpose if one-by-one individuals stand up and address a congregation in languages which no-one understands; but it's also entirely okay, Scriptural, beneficial and positively impacting even upon unbelievers if everyone speaks with tongues out loud at the same time without an interpreter and prophesies when the Holy Spirit is being poured out. It draws people to God. Since "tongues are a sign to unbelievers" it follows that we needn't shield unbelievers from ever hearing tongues.

Those are my thoughts about I Cor.14:33,40. Does this liberate you?

Is Population-Growth and Sustainability a Reason Why Jesus Must Return in Our Generation?

A friend told me that Jesus has to return in our generation because the earth won't be able to sustain the population growth if the world continues.

But I wonder what population the earth can actually sustain.

Projections about sustainability have sometimes been very wrong, in the past!

For example, when the first settlement at Botany Bay was struggling for survival in the late 1700s, men wondered whether the land surrounding Sydney would be able to sustain the fledgling population of less than 3,000 - but today that very same land has become home to 4.5 million of some of the world's most well-fed people. That means the land around Sydney has proven capable of sustaining a population 150,000% more than was originally thought possible. That's how wrong projections can be sometimes!

Sydney's population will keep growing, if the Lord tarries, and the people should survive just fine. The current population density of Sydney is only 2,058 people per square kilometre, compared with 43,079 people per square kilometre in Manila, Philippines - and yet the population of Manila is surviving just fine. So why couldn't Sydney's population survive just as well even if its population increases to the same density as Manila's?

If Sydney's population increases to the same density as Manila's - which would require a population growth of 2,093% to 95.2 million people, on today's figures - I'm sure the fortunate people of Sydney will still have equal chance of surviving, if they match the industriousness of their Manila counterparts.

And imagine if the population of every city in the world - not only Sydney's - increases to a population-density equal to Manila's. Since Manila's 38.55 square kilometres of land and its surrounding resource base is capable of sustaining 1,660,714 people - based on that model, other existing cities with a similar or better surrounding resource base also ought to be able to survive when they grow to have the same population density. Based on the number of exisiting cities in the world, that means the planet could easily sustain a population of multiple-trillions of people!

And that's without even factoring-in the certainty of improved technology over time, which always makes life easier. Improved technology improves sustainability.

Population-growth itself makes life easier. Economies always grow when the population grows. A fledgling population always made survival difficult, but a growing population multiplies the potential for prosperity.

Besides, God has promised to turn the wilderness into a fruitful field. He can cause water to spring up from the ground. In the Scriptures He has promised to do so. We are already seeing this happen in Israel and in parts of Australia. Once desolate blocks of land have become watered and fruitful and are once again attracting fauna.

Even if only existing cities grow to have the same population density as Manila, the earth's population will become multiple-trillions of people. How much bigger could the earth's population be if brand new cities which don't currently exist are founded! There is still so much unused space, so many unused resources on earth.

I've seen multiple-thousands of people living an entirely self-sufficient lifestyle on hilltops all over the southern Philippines - with plenty of room yet for population growth. And there are many more mountains and fields around the world besides those in the Philippines which as yet are almost completely uninhabited. They are surrounded with resource bases. There is so much available land in the earth. And the oceans are teeming with fish. The earth could probably sustain a population of many, many multiples of trillions or even more.

Concerns about sustainability are nothing new. In the early 1800s one author felt the earth was running out of resources, and he predicted a dire worldwide crisis by 1850. Needless to say the crisis didn't happen, and now individual countries have populations equal to what was the total world population in 1850 - the world's population has grown by 566.6% since then. He was wrong about sustainability then, and modern end-times pundits are probably wrong about sustainability now.

I'm actually looking forward to seeing the improvements on the planet as the population keeps growing!

So although Jesus could return in our generation - population growth isn't necessarily a reason why He must.

"But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father" (Mark 13:32).

The Voice of the Holy Spirit

I was walking down the street in Taree, NSW, on my way to take a look at the Manning River. Suddenly the Holy Spirit said, "Stop. Turn right." It was quite an arresting voice.

So I turned right, instead of continuing on down the street to the river. I got a little way up the street, and then stopped. I asked the Lord why He led me here. I looked up, and noticed an indigenous radio station across the road named Naralingi.

Straightaway I crossed the street, and walked in.

A receptionsist asked, "Can I help you?" I proceeded to tell her that I had travelled to Taree with an aboriginal Pastor for meetings, and asked whether the station would like to interview him.

They were keen, so Pastor Francis Bundock and I came back and did a live interview. We even took our guitar into the interview and sang live. The interviewer was impressed that a non indigenous person and an indigenous person were working together.

After the interview, one of the staff out the back said all the hairs on her arms were standing up. She was touched by the anointing.

We also met someone later that night who had heard our interview.

Pastor Francis took a casette recording of his interview back home to Muli Muli, with rejoicing.

When I walked in off the street, the staff at the station didn't know Pastor Francis, much less me. But we ended up doing three live interviews in two stations.

That's an example of what can happen when you heed the voice of the Holy Spirit.

The Promise of the Spirit

I was stopped at the pedestrian crossing across the road from Brisbane's central post office. There was a man standing there selling newspapers. So I decided to witness to him while waiting for the lights to change.

"Are you a Christian?" I asked.

"Yes," he said, "I'm a Catholic".

I wanted to examine his faith a bit further though. So I asked, "Do you believe in your heart that God raised Jesus from the dead?"

"Yes," he said.

"Do you confess with your mouth that God raised Jesus from the dead?"

"Yes".

I thought to myself, Well that's good enough for me.

So I thought I'd share with him about the baptism with the Holy Spirit. If he isn't already saved, he'll get saved in the process, I thought to myself.

Sometimes that's a good approach to take with Catholic people. They have all the right words about Jesus: but they can readily tell if they've received the Holy Spirit or not!

So I told him about the experience of being baptized with the Holy Spirit, and about speaking with tongues. He had never received such an experience and listened heartily. Finally I asked him if he would like to receive the Holy Spirit. He eagerly said yes.

So I laid hands on him, and he began to praise God and I heard him speaking in another tongue. All of this took place on the roadside at peak hour by a busy inner city pedestrian crossing.

Then the lights changed, and I said I had to go. I left him there smiling, with a glowing face, praising His Lord.

"The promise [of the Holy Spirit] is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call" (Acts 2:39)