Blessed Economist

Financial Markets

2026-03-19T16:09:00.002+13:00

I have been puzzled why financial markets have been so slow to react to the US/Israeli attack on Iran, and the subsequent closure of the Straits of Hormuz. This is unfortunate, because the only voice that Donald Trump responds to is negative news from the financial markets.

Sarah Conor explains why the markets have held up.

Financial markets treat the economy as an engine driven by monetary policy. Reality dictates otherwise. At its base, the economy is an energy processing mechanism. Central banks cannot print oil or other commodities.

As we enter week three of the Strait of Hormuz closure in March 2026, macroeconomic models fail because they misdiagnose the problem. Physically removing 10-20% of oil and natural gas consumed starves the global engine...

What’s unique about this shock is that it originates on the supply side.

Typically, a demand shock originates in the financial layer. The 2008 Great Financial Crisis and the 2020 COVID-19 lockdowns serve as examples. In these scenarios, the infrastructure of the world remains intact, but consumers stop buying. Credit freezes or governments mandate business closures causing prices to fall. Central banks solve demand shocks by lowering interest rates and injecting fiat currency to stimulate consumption.

A supply shock originates in the physical layer. The current Hormuz closure is a supply shock. Consumers (by consumers, I am referring to any buyer - individuals, businesses, governments) have the means and will to buy, but physical goods vanish. As a result, production halts because the baseline input is absent.

Shortages push prices up. Unlike demand shocks, central banks are stuck in a stagflation trap. Inflation requires contractionary policy to starve demand, but weaker production requires lower rates to offset demand destruction. Monetary policy cannot fix a physical deficit.

The problem with modern economics is that it models financial, but not necessarily physical, reality. It assumes consumers reallocate spending to cover higher energy costs, creating demand destruction elsewhere. This is a miscalculation.

When 10% to 20% of global oil, natural gas, and fertilizer leaves the market, those raw materials cease to exist for the end user. Capital cannot substitute for physical joules of energy. A freight network cannot run on fiat currency and nitrogen-based synthesis requires physical gas.

Most market traders were not around during the 1973 oil crisis, so they dont understand the current situation.

Shepherds and Wolves

2026-02-13T16:29:00.011+13:00

I have been reading with interest the various statements from churches and ministries apologising for their slowness in providing a public warning about the errors and abuses committed by men whom they supported and promoted.

Their apologies to the victims seem to be sincere and heartfelt. They declare that they will protect their people by not using the fallen person in their services and conferences. This is good, but one thing seems to be missing from all the statements.

None of these contrite Christians leaders seems to be asking how it was that they were able to work with the problematic prophetic minister in various places over many years and not realise that something serious was wrong with them.

This is not just prioritising gift over character, as is often said. It is failure to discern a gift that is flawed and an abusive personality.

The Christian leaders who raised the problem person up and supported the expansion of their ministry claim to be spiritually-anointed prophetic leaders. Many of them call themselves prophets. They all claim to be experts on the gifts of the Spirit and leaders of the move of the Holy Spirit in our time. They all claim to be able to hear the voice of the Spirit better than the average bear. I presume that they all know how to move in the gift of discernment.

Given these claims, how could they not discern that a person ministering alongside them was operating fraudulently? How could they not discern that there was something perverted about the person’s sexual behaviour? This is not just an issue of slowness to give a public warning. It is a failure to discern the problem in the first place.

When Elisha’s servant cheated and demanded money from Naaman after he had been healed, the prophet knew what his servant had done before he got home (2 Num 4:19-27). If an Old Testament prophet could discern a problem so effectively, why can a New Testament prophet not do it.

A shepherd had three main roles.

Ensuring the sheep are sufficiently fed to grow and survive
Healing sheep that are sick or get injured.
Protecting the sheep from thieves and predators.

Protecting sheep from external threats is a core part of an elder’s role. Allowing a thief or a wild dog into the fold where sheep should be safe is the worst thing that a shepherd can do.

When Paul was getting near the end of his ministry, he gave a warning to the elders of the church in Ephesus.

Keep watch over yourselves and all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers. Be shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his own blood. I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after them. So be on your guard! (Acts 20:28-31).

Paul warns the elders and shepherds that abusive people would come into their church. He warned that people whom they trusted would begin to harm the disciples they were caring for. Protecting their sheep from abusers is an essential part of the role of an elder.

Paul did not say “Maybe”. He was certain that spiritual wolves would come and try to harm the flock. All elders and shepherds should be prepared for dealing with this problem.

Claiming ignorance does not work. It is not satisfactory for an elder or pastor to say that they did not know how to identify a threatening animal, or what to do if they encountered one. David was just a shepherd boy and he knew how to deal with a lion and a bear that threatened his sheep. It was the essence of his job as a shepherd.

The failure of leaders to discern problems with people whose ministries they were platforming is a serious failure. They have failed one of the main tasks of every elder. They should be asking themselves if they are capable of continuing in this task of being a shepherd, given the seriousness of their failure.

Christian Ministries

2026-02-10T17:05:00.071+13:00

A feature of the modern church that is quite unique is that most Christian activity is dominated by big ministries. There are various types of ministry, and they are often associated with the name of a person.

speaking/teaching ministries
healing ministries
evangelistic ministries
podcast ministries
television/radio ministries
social media ministries
Some mega-churches are closely associated with the ministry of a big leader.

The future of the church seems to depend on these ministries.

The most effective Christians who want to serve God seriously are expected to establish a ministry organisation. Unfortunately, if big ministries do everything that is important, there is not much left for ordinary followers of Jesus to do.

Christian ministries provide employment for many serious Christians, as they need staff to:

write and edit products
preparing training material and courses
editing videos
ghost writing books
organising speaking itineraries
developing and producing promotional material
organising advertising.
shipping products and collecting revenue.

Employing staff to do all these tasks can be quite expensive. The result is a big monthly budget.

Serving on the staff of a Christian ministry can be a demanding role.

The staff see the leader of the ministry at their worst and bear the brunt of their ego when they are frustrated.
The staff are often the last to be paid when funding is tight.
The staff are expected to be personally loyal to their leader. They cannot criticise the leader of the ministry, even if they see things that are seriously wrong, as this would jeopardise their employment. An employee who is critical can be publicly ostracised by being labelled as disloyal. If they are blacklisted by their leader, it could be difficult for them to gain employment elsewhere.
The setup of the ministry means that the only people who get close enough to the leader to know them well are the senior staff. However, none of these senior staff can criticise their leader as they could lose their employment and income. This means that the leader of the ministry has no real accountability and is effectively uncorrectable.
People resigning from ministries are often expected to sign “non-disclosure agreements” (NDAs). This ensures that they cannot reveal bad things that happened in the church.

Funding a ministry is very expensive. Thousands of dollars will have to be raised each month to pay salaries. Most ministries will rent or buy a building, so rent or interest on the mortgage will have to be paid each month. Vehicle costs and air fares will need to be paid. The big budget means that the ministry will need a constant stream of revenue just to remain viable.

Most of the revenue will be raised through donations and sales of merchandise. This brings huge temptation to ministry leaders. To keep donations flowing and merchandise selling, the leader has to keep their ministry before the public. If publicity dies off, revenue from donations and merchandise sales can fall off.
Ministry leaders can be tempted to exaggerate their achievements by embellishing their description of healings that have occurred or embroidering accounts of important people they have prophesied to. They can be tempted to spice up their words of knowledge and prophecies with information obtained from the internet or other people. In the age of social media, people have short attention spans, so constant hype is needed to keep a ministry in the public eye so that the revenue keeps flowing in. The temptations are huge.
To keep the revenue from donations and merchandise sales flowing, big ministries need endorsements from other big ministries. Big-name endorsements of their books and teaching materials boost sales. Invitations to speak at conferences organised by big-name ministries are opportunities to sell merchandise. Invitations to speak at their churches helps in to bring in donations.
A network of ministries has emerged where they all provide endorsements and speaking opportunities for each other. These opportunities are critical for keeping the revenue flowing. A culture of mutual support between ministries has developed where support is received in return for support given.
This dependence on endorsements and speaking opportunities is one reason why these ministries are unwilling to acknowledge sins and failures. If something negative gets associated with a ministry, the flow of revenue will slow. Christian ministries are often reluctant call out problems in other ministries because they need them to support their own ministry.
Many ministries tithe on their income. This is an opportunity to do good, but it gives the ministry great power. It can build up other ministries by giving donations, but it can also weaken them by stopping them. Fear of losing financial support can create a reluctance to criticise serous faults.
Ministries are run like businesses. Business practices often overwhelm gospel standards. These practices have flowed over from ministries into churches.

Most Christian ministries have limited accountability and oversight. They will often have a board of some kind, but the members of the board have limited authority.

Some will be friends of the leader, who will be unwilling to challenge them.
Others will be wealthy donors who have a big investment in the ministry. They will be reluctant to damage their investment by rocking the boat.

I realise that not all Christian ministries succumb to the temptations above, but the fact that so many big-name leaders are falling from grace due to sexual immorality and fraudulent behaviour suggests that few are strong enough to resist them. This suggests that there is something desperately wrong with this approach to ministry.

The dominance of “ministries” in the modern church does not fit with the teaching of the New Testament.

Peter and James did not set up a ministry organisation in Jerusalem. In fact, they created problems when they stayed in Jerusalem (contrary to Jesus’ command) and became too big. I explain the problems in Governmental Apostles and Centralised Finances. They were pulling followers of Jesus into Jerusalem, rather than sending them out into the world.
Paul did not establish an organisation called “Paul and Silas Ministries”. Paul kept moving out to new places so that he would not become too big in the places that he had planted churches. I presume that this is why he wanted to go to Spain. Unfortunately, he got waylaid, and it damaged his ministry. I explain this in Paul and James in Jerusalem.

The church that Jesus established operated in a totally different way from the modern Christian ministries. They should be led by a team of elders with different giftings that complement each other ie balanced leadership. I have explained how this works in my book called Being Church Where We Live.

Spiritual protection comes through elders who are working together and submitting to each other, not through endorsement by distant big names. Submission to other elders is the key to spiritual protection. If one elder makes a mistake, the others will bring correction. If an elder is under spiritual attack, the others will stand against the attack in spiritual warfare. Submission is the key to protection.

Word of Knowledge as a Power Gift

2026-02-07T14:03:00.014+13:00

The modern use of “words of knowledge” turns it into a sign gift, which is harmful.

Analysis of the spiritual gifts described in 1 Corinthians 12 often groups them into three broad categories: revelation gifts, speaking gifts, and power gifts.

Power gifts (in this context) are gifts that demonstrate God’s power in action. They are about action and impact, not information or persuasion.

They change situations directly
They are externally observable (even by non-believers)
They point attention to God’s power, not human skill

There are two main power gifts:

1. Working of Miracles (1 Cor 12:10)

When Jesus fed the four thousand, everyone saw the miracle, even those who were still assessing him to decide if they would follow him.
When Paul shook off a viper that bit his hand and was not harmed, the people of Malta could see the miracle worked by God (Acts 28:3-6).

2. Gifts of Healing (1 Cor 12:9)

When Jesus healed the sick people that he encountered, the power and grace of God was visible to everyone, even the Jewish leaders who opposed him.
When Peter and John healed the crippled man at the Beautiful Gate of the temple, everyone could see him walking around. They were filled with amazement at what God had done (Acts 3:1-10).

These two gifts are very important for evangelism as they demonstrate the power and grace of God to people who don’t know him. If you have been healed of a sickness, it is hard to argue that God does not love you.

The Word of Knowledge is a Revelation Gift

These spiritual gifts reveal information from God that a person could not know by natural means. A Word of Knowledge is revelation (not a permanent ability) where God discloses information about the past or present that explains what is going on in a tricky situation.

Jesus knew by a Word of Knowledge what the Teachers of the Law were thinking when the paralysed man was lowered through the roof for him to be healed (Mark 2:8).
Ananias was given Saul’s exact street address in Damascus and told what Saul was currently doing (Acts 9:10–12).
When Peter was on the rooftop, the Spirit informed him that three men were downstairs looking for him before he saw them (Acts 10:19–20).

These words of knowledge were given to help the apostles minister to people in need.

Modern Use

The main use of the Word of Knowledge in the modern church is to identify people in a church meeting to be called forward to receive prayer for healing or a prophetic word. The speaker gives out some titbits of information about the person they want to minister to. If the person is sick, they might say something about the sickness. When they come forward, the speaker will pray for them. If the speaker wants to give a prophetic word to the person, they say something about the person that will identify them. When the person comes forward, the speaker will give them a prophecy of some kind.

There are several problems with this shift in use of the word of knowledge gift

Lack of Biblical Precedent:
I have searched the New Testament for an example of a word of knowledge to identify people at a meeting who will receive prayer for healing or a prophetic word, and I could not find one. Jesus and the apostles did not use the Word of Knowledge in that way. I am uncomfortable about using a spiritual gift in a way that it is not used in the New Testament.
Turning Revelation into a "Sign":
The modern use of the words of knowledge turns it into a sign gift, which it is not. Its purpose seems to be to demonstrate that the person speaking has God’s anointing and blessing.
Human Focus:
Power gifts are supposed to demonstrate the power of God for everyone to see. Using the word of knowledge to call out people at a meeting for prayer or a prophecy points to human skill more than to God’s power. It builds up the status of the person speaking.
Difficulty in Testing:
Testing words of knowledge given in this way is almost impossible. The fact that someone comes forward indicating that the word fits them does not prove it came from God. It could just be coincidence that someone fitting the description is present. The inability to test these words means that there is very little accountability. The modern church just assumes that these words of knowledge are correct, even if no one comes forward. Since these words are rarely tested, there is potential for cheating using information from social media or from other sources.
Private vs. Public:
A true word of knowledge is usually directed towards a person who needs help. They are the only one who needs to hear it. This means that the Holy Spirit will usually prefer to give the gift in private, rather than in big meetings. Using the gift for a different purpose takes it into an environment where it does not fit easily.
Performance:
The modern use of the word of knowledge turns it into a performance before spectators, but the Holy Spirit does not like operating this way. He likes to work in public places, but only when he can clearly manifest the power of God.

The word of knowledge is a wonderful gift. We need it more than ever to deal with numerous problems and situations that never seem to be resolved. However, I believe that we have devalued the gift by using it as a tool to identify people to come forward for ministry in church meetings. This has probably grieved the Holy Spirit, which has prevented us from receiving the gift in situations where we really do need it to help people.

When Jesus was being tempted by Satan, he encouraged to jump off the highest point of the temple. Performing this dazzling sign would cause people to worship and honour him (Luke 4:9-12). Jesus responded by warning against testing God. He faced a temptation to build up his ministry by manipulating signs. Turning a revelation gift into a sign gift that will glorify the ministry of the person up the front is a similar temptation. Followers of Jesus should avoid this practice.

Healing Techniques

2026-02-04T17:42:00.000+13:00

While reading the gospels recently, I have noticed that Jesus mostly healed people whom he encountered on the roadways and marketplaces as he was travelling around.

The Modern Church has changed that model.

Most prayer for healing is done by itinerant ministers and pastors.
Most prayer for the sick is done in public meetings and church services.
Healing ministries identify people to pray for by using words of knowledge.
The person identified is called to the front of the meeting and receives prayer for healing.

I cannot find an example of this kind of ministry in the New Testament. Almost everyone healed came to Jesus or his disciples in public places during the activities of everyday life. None were identified by a word of knowledge.

There are several problems with the modern model for healing via word of knowledge.

The modern method turns the “word of knowledge” into a sign gift, which is harmful (I will explain this in a future post).
The gift of healing only reaches believers and people who come to church meetings. In the gospels, many of the people healed were outsiders who experienced the grace and power of God when they were healed.
Under the modern method, the gift of healing is limited to a few experts.
Using the word of knowledge in the modern way tends to diminish and devalue it. It is easy for a person with a healing ministry to get a few useful words of knowledge.
- Person with a sore back
- Person with pain in their leg
- Person on the left side of the room
All these have been heard before, so they are easy to get without much prayer or long waiting on the Lord. Those who do it frequently will quickly learn what works and what does not.
These words of knowledge are incapable of being tested. In any meeting of 200 people, there will be many sick people, especially if it is a “healing meeting”. It would usually be possible to find a person with pain in any part of the body that could be mentioned. I notice that the people in these ministries rarely admit that their word of knowledge is wrong. Instead, they do one of two things.
- Admonish the unidentified person who does not come forward for rejecting God’s grace.
- Widen the description given in the word of knowledge to make it easier for someone present to fit it.
Testing these types of word of knowledge is almost impossible. The fact that someone comes forward indicating that the word fits them does not prove it came from God. If the meeting is full of people carrying sickness, it is highly likely that someone with the nominated problem is present. Some people will be tempted to make their sickness fit with the word of knowledge so they are selected to receive prayer.
The inability to test these words of knowledge means that there is very little accountability. The people operating in this way mostly assume that their words of knowledge were mostly correct. This is risky. Since these words are rarely tested, there is potential for cheating using information from social media, etc.
Dozens of people are usually prayed for during each meeting, so the prayer for healing has to be done quite quickly: Wham, bam and move on! Sickness can be hard to deal with and often takes time, so a quick prayer does not deal with many problems.
The modern method allows the person doing the ministering to control the sicknesses that he/she gets to pray for. I have never heard a word of knowledge for a “person in a wheelchair who is paralysed from the waist down” or a “person with stage four cancer that has riddled their body.” I am sure that God often wants to heal these conditions, but the person controlling the ministry will tend to avoid them. Thus, the method works better for the minister than for the sick.
I presume the reason for calling people out by a word of knowledge is to build up their faith for healing. A person whom God has selected for prayer will trust him more. But this is not necessarily real faith. If the word of knowledge is not real, the faith that is based on it will not be real.
There is rarely any follow-up if the person who is identified and prayed for is not healed. This is sad.
Very little thought is given to how a person feels if they are not healed, because the assumption is that people who are called out by word of knowledge will be healed. I never hear a leader identify someone by word of knowledge and say that God wants them to grow in maturity through the pain of their sickness. If they are called out by word of knowledge, the assumption is that God wants them to be healed. If they are not healed, they could feel like they have rejected God’s will.
Most people who believe that God has selected them for healing by giving a word of knowledge will feel that there is something wrong with them if they are not healed. They failed to get what God wanted them to receive, so they will come under condemnation. I suspect that this condemnation is one reason for the lack of healing in the modern church. People have taken offence against God when they came under condemnation for not receiving a healing that was seemingly offered to them by the person at the front of the meeting with a word of knowledge.
Itinerant ministries usually move on after the meeting.
- No checking is done to establish that the people were really healed. When a person is selected by word of knowledge and prayed for at the front of their meeting, there is huge pressure for them find some reduction in their pain. If they say nothing has happened, they will look bad, so they will usually try to find some in improvement just to please the person praying. The proof of the pudding is how they feel the next day, but the itinerant minister will not know because they have gone.
- No checking is done of people who are not healed. They rarely receive help. They are left to struggle on their own.
- No checking is done to ensure that the words of knowledge were correct. This leaves the process open to cheating.
The travelling minister may believe that they have had a successful meeting, but they actually don’t know.
Jesus operated in the streets and marketplaces, where the people of the world could see. More critical eyes could test that everything was authentic. His opponents were always trying to find something wrong with what he was doing. He was always authentic, so that did not matter. The public scrutiny would also have kept his disciples honest when they were sent out in pairs to heal the sick.

I have seen people healed by the power of the Holy Spirit. I have seen him open up a situation powerfully by giving an appropriate word of knowledge. But turning the word of knowledge/healing into a standard technique is a mistake.

I love the gift of healing, but I believe that we would see better results, and perhaps have less controversy, if we operated more like Jesus.

Nebs

2026-01-10T17:10:00.002+13:00

In an interview with four New York Times Reporters last week, Donald Trump conveyed how emboldened he feels to exercise his power around the globe.

Q. Is there anything that could stop you.

A. Yeah, there is one thing. My own morality. My own mind. It’s the only thing that can stop me. And that’s very good.

The last person who spoke like this was our old friend Nebs.... and it did not end well. And Nebs did not claim to be a Christian as Donald Trump has (Dan 4:30).

Personal Relationship With Jesus

2026-01-07T05:00:00.052+13:00

A TV preaching that heard recently ended his message by asking for people who did not have a Personal Relationship With Jesus to respond. He then led them in a “sinner’s prayer.”

Modern preachers use the phrase “Personal Relationship With Jesus” so frequently that we have forgotten what it means, and never ponder if it actually makes sense at all. I see several problems with the term.

One purpose of the term is to distinguish evangelical Christians from legalistic religion, or ritualistic religion. Yet once the preacher had identified those who wanted a Personal Relationship With Jesus and led them in a sinner’s prayer, he gave them a set of four rules to follow.
- Pray every day
- Read the Bible
- Go to church
I presume that he assumes that these rules will eventually produce a Personal Relationship with Jesus, but I am not sure if it does. It actually makes our faith seem like a legalistic religion.
Why do we need the word “personal” in the phrase? Aren't all relationships personal? A relationship that is not personal is probably not a relationship. So the term “personal” is redundant.
Jesus never told people that they needed to have a Personal Relationship With Him. He called them to be disciples and obey his teaching. He commanded them to obey him, because they loved him.

Jesus explained to his disciples that he was going away, so their existing relationship with them, whatever it was, would end. He promised that the Holy Spirit would come and that he would teach them to obey Jesus, but that would be a totally different relationship.
A personal relationship is not a political relationship. Jesus is a Messiah/King. His disciples called him “Lord”. So the relationship with Jesus is a political relationship. We relate to him in a servant/master relationship, so it is misleading to describe it as a personal relationship.
Paul did not tell the readers of his letters to have a Personal Relationship With Jesus. He talked about fellowship with the Holy Spirit (2 Cor 13:14), but we have forgotten what the term “fellowship” means. Friendship is the closest word to the meaning of fellowship, yet I have never heard a preacher telling people that they should become a friend of Jesus.
The television preacher told his listeners that they should go to church. I presume to develop their Personal Relationship With Jesus. However, I am not sure that is correct. I don’t develop a relationship with a famous person that I don’t know by:
- reading a book about the person.
- listening to people singing songs about the person.
- listening to a man talking about the person.
I might learn something from these activities, but there is no guarantee that I will get to know the absent person well.
Reading a person’s biography is not the same as getting to know them personally. To do that, I would have to be involved in their life in some way. So reading the bible is not a guarantee that a person will get to know Jesus personally.
Prayer is important: a few people enjoy it, but most people find it really hard. Many struggle and fail. So if prayer is the key to developing a Personal Relationship With Jesus, then it is not surprising that many church attendees are not sure if they have one.
People can appropriate the rescue that Jesus provided without becoming his best friend. They have done it throughout history.

So maybe a Personal Relationship With Jesus is a nice to have, but it is not the heart of Jesus good news.

My Experience
What has this been like for me?

I have been a follower of Jesus for fifty years. I call myself that because that seems to be the nature of the relationship. He is the leader, and I am the follower. (A follower does not have to be the best friend of their leader).

I think of myself as a friend of the Holy Spirit. He is the one who speaks to me. I get this quiet inner witness that I have learned the way that he speaks. I talk to him and give him permission to do things in my life and in the places where I exercise influence/authority. He is the one who acts, so it makes sense to talk to him directly.

I do not ask Jesus to do things. But I ask him to show me what he wants me to do. But it is usually the Holy Spirit who does that. And I often apologise to Jesus for not doing what he asked me to do.

I do not ask our father to do things very often. He knows better than me what needs to be done. My role is to give him permission to do it.

I love Jesus because of who he is and the wonderful things that he has done. For him to leave his place in the spiritual realms and become a human is amazing. For him to be willing to die on a cross for humans who had rejected him is mind-blowing generosity. So I love Jesus and tell him that he is wonderful.

This is a relationship of awe and wonder. I am not sure if this is the Personal Relationship with Jesus that the preacher was talking about. I love reading the Bible, but that is probably because I have an intellectual bent and a curious mind. I have learned a huge amount about who Jesus is and what he has done, but I also know that this does not automatically translate into a relationship with Jesus (although it can help).

I suspect that many Christians don’t have a Personal Relationship With Jesus like the TV preacher promises, but they pretend to have one, because they are unwilling to admit how tonight it is to be a follower of Jesus.

Challenge
I don’t like the expression Personal Relationship With Jesus. I know what the TV preacher is trying to say, but I don’t think his listeners really understand what he is offering them.

I presume that most of the preacher’s listeners are not sure how to obtain the Personal Relationship With Jesus that they are supposed to have. And I suspect that many preachers do not really know how to teach them about achieving it, either.

Followers of Jesus are called to share his message with a new generation of people who are unchurched. The expression Personal Relationship With Jesus does not mean much to them.

We will need to find more effective ways to communicate the gospel (even word is not very useful now). We will need to find better ways to describe what Jesus has done and how we appropriate it. We will have to find better ways to describe how we can follow him by communicating with his Holy Spirit.

Question
Tell me what it has been like for your in the comments. But be honest, do not pretend to look good.

Migration and the Kingdom of God

2025-12-30T17:26:00.002+13:00

I have updated my article on Migration. Here is an excerpt.

When Jesus spoke about the Kingdom of God, he was not envisioning a nation-state with national boundaries. He envisioned a boundaryless situation more like the Roman Empire, which dominated the known world.

The Kingdom of God will be made up of communities of people who are united by their commitment to serving and obeying Jesus. They will support people of all cultures who live in their midst. People will be free to travel wherever in the world that they choose to go. Wherever they choose to live, they will find a Kingdom Community that welcomes them and will support them.

As the Kingdom of God grows, nation-states will wither away as they become irrelevant and lose their viability.

Risky Plan

2025-12-27T17:05:00.003+13:00

Imagine if
two evil spirits had attacked baby Jesus and strangled him while his protecting angels were celebrating his birth with the shepherds.

What if
the wise men had misunderstood their dream and returned to Jerusalem after they had found Jesus. Herod would have gone to worship him, but after he had left, he would have sent a couple of his most vicious henchmen to slaughter Jesus and his parents. Jesus did not receive the Holy Spirit until he was baptised by John, so he would not have been able to heal himself as he was bleeding to death.

What if
Joseph had not understood his warning dream, as we often don’t, and had remained in Bethlehem after Jesus was born, because work was plentiful and well-paid. Jesus would have been killed when Herod killed all the boys under the age of two living in the vicinity of Bethlehem.

What if
Jesus had been helping his father as a builder when a heap of stones fell from the wall of a building and killed him.

Any of the possibilities listed above could have happened. This shows that God took on a huge risk when he sent his only to the earth son to be born as a baby and grow into childhood and eventually to become an adult who would would deliver the people of the world.

If Jesus had been killed, God would have lost his only son. He could not create another one, because Jesus was not created. If Jesus was killed as a child, God’s plan would have failed. The Trinity would become incomplete.

The success of God’s plan depended on a dozen people hearing from God and doing what he needed them to do. If any one of these had missed it, as we often do, the plan would have failed.

More at God’s Big Strategy.

Whose Shoulder?

2025-12-25T17:12:00.002+13:00

For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
Of the increase of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign … over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the LORD Almighty
will accomplish this (Is 9:6-7).

This is simple. Jesus has been born. He will be the government
from that time forward and forever.

So why does Donald Trump think that he should be the government?
or Keir Starmer, or Christopher Luxon?

Herod understood this prophecy.
He knew that his government was a goner,
so he tried to kill Jesus.

Satan understood the threat.
That is why he came up with clever deception that
This prophecy is not for now,
but for later,
This is why he pretends that his government is for now;
Jesus government comes at the end of the age.
You could trust Satan to thrust his shoulder in.

No!!
The government is on Jesus shoulders
He will govern with justice and righteousness.
and his government will never stop increasing.
The Zeal of the Lord will do it,
and all human governments will wither away.

Ant World

2025-12-24T13:15:00.006+13:00

Here is an audio version of the parable that can be downloaded.

Ant World

Ant World – A Parable

2025-12-20T16:45:00.011+13:00

Once upon a time.....
a botanist who had been studying ants all his life discovered an ant colony at a site where a new road was being built. The machinery that would build the road and destroy the ant colony would arrive within the next week.

He loved ants and did not want them to suffer, so he set to and built an ant world on a table in the spare room of his house. His construction contained everything that ants would need for a good life, including food, warmth and moisture. The botanist had studied ants for most of his life, so he understood everything that they needed. His ant world was a paradise for ants.

The ants lived happily in the ant world for many years. But one day, a restless ant found a crack in the outside wall of their home. He pushed out through the crack and dropped onto the floor of the spare room. A group of ants followed him as he moved out the front door and into the garden.

The move into the garden proved to be a dangerous adventure, because the garden was full of birds that attacked and killed many of the escaping ants. The few who survived formed a small colony, but the attacks by the birds were so severe that the colony was in danger of dying out.

The young ants who were born in the garden colony heard stories about the paradise in the ant world that their ancestors had escaped from, but they did not know how to get back there. As they struggled for survival, they longed to get back, but they had no hope of doing it.

Although the ants had escaped from his care, the botanist loved the ants that were struggling to survive in the garden. He built a tube that went back up into the ant world, but he had no way of showing the ants in the garden how to find it. Even if they had found it, they would have been scared to go up the tube.

The botanist did not have the ability to speak to the ants, and the ants had no ability to hear him speak. If he went too close to the garden colony, he would be in danger of crushing with his feet the ants that he wanted to save. He could write a big sign on the front door of his house, but the ants could not read it.

The botanist decided that the only way he could resolve the situation was to transform his favourite daughter into an ant. He told her what he wanted her to do. She would go into the ant colony and tell them about the paradise in the ant world that was still open to them. She would show the ants the way to the tube that he had built that led back up into the world. She would tell the ants that the botanist still loved them and would look after them in the ant world paradise. He would forgive them for their mistake, and there would be no negative consequences.

Once she knew what to do, the botanist used scientific power to change his daughter into an ant. He took her carefully into the garden and place here near the dying ant colony. This was a hugely risky move, as once she was on the ground, he could not distinguish her from any other ants. The birds were still flying around, and if she could not get into the shelter of the ant colony, they would quickly pick her off. Her father could not protect her from destruction and failure.

At first, the daughter ant received a hostile reception from the ant colony. The guards recognised her as an outsider and tried to attack and kill her. They only stopped when she told them that she had good news for the colony. Some still wanted to kill her, but a few thought they should listen and took her to the leaders of the colony. They were hostile at first, but she pleaded with them, and her description of the ant world paradise appealed to them. Eventually, they agreed that they had nothing to lose from following her up the tube to see if they could find the ant world. Their situation in the garden was so desperate that they decided it was worth the risk.

When nightfall came, and the birds went to bed, the daughter ant led the members of the ant colony towards the house. They filed under the front door and into the spare room. The daughter ant led them up the tube and back into the ant world paradise. The ants living in the ant world recognised the ants from the garden as their distant cousins and welcomed them back into their paradise. They quickly settled back into the pleasant life that it provided.

The ants guarding the ant world did not recognise the daughter ant, so they would not let her in. They pushed her out of their world and back down the tube through which she had rescued the garden ants. This seemed like another disaster, because the daughter ant would be quickly killed by the birds if she went out into the garden to find some food.

Fortunately, the watching botanist was prepared, because he had expected that his daughter would be rejected and ejected. When the rescuer ant tumbled down out of the tube, he knew it was his daughter. He quickly and gently scooped her up and reversed the process that had transformed her into an ant. Once she was restored, she was even more special to him because she had rescued the ants that he cared about.

The botanist and his daughter lived happily ever after....

And the ants in the ant world continue to enjoy the paradise that the botanist had prepared for them.

This story is a bit stupid because no sensible man would turn his favourite daughter into an ant that could be eaten by birds just to rescue a few runaway ants, even if he was a botanist who had spent his life studying them.

Yet this is something like what God did when he took the immense risk of sending his favourite son to be born as a human baby to rescue the people who had rejected his care, even though he had created them.

This story demonstrates what a great act of love the incarnation was. God did something that no human father would do.

More at The Incarnation.

God's Strategy

2025-12-13T14:43:00.000+13:00

This is very well done.
God's Strategy

Emmanuel Todd

2025-11-04T16:33:00.003+13:00

Various political and religious commentators are drawing parallels between Donald Trump and Hitler’s Germany. Emmanuel Todd has a different take on this issue in a recent article. He argues that European institutions are becoming the real far-right, because they are out of touch with reality.

China

2025-10-31T16:36:00.002+13:00

Kaiser Y Kuo has written an important article about the role of China in the modern world called The Great Reckoning.

Terrible Beast

2025-10-29T16:26:00.000+13:00

Daniel had a vision of a Terrible Beast.

It had large iron teeth; it crushed and devoured its victims and trampled underfoot whatever was left (Dan 7:7).

He saw an Empire that would crush and devour many other nations.

In a recent interview Jeffrey Sachs described a nation that is ruthlessly trampling and destroying other nations. He is not a Christian, but I think he got a glimpse of the Terrible Beast.

Good News of the Kingdom

2025-10-10T13:45:00.000+13:00

Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people (Matt 4:23).

Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 8:12).

The good news of the kingdom is that Jesus has been made king and he has sent the Holy Spirit to establish his kingdom throughout the earth. The Book of Acts is the story of the Holy Spirit beginning the task of bringing his kingdom into being.

Logic and Resurrection

2025-09-27T11:32:00.001+12:00

Some Christians say they cannot believe in the resurrection of Jesus. This is not logical. If God cannot raise someone from the dead, he is not much of a god, but just a bystander in the universe. So why believe in him? If God exists, then anything is possible, including miracles. So the key issue is not belief in the resurrection, but belief in God. If God exists, then raising someone being raised from the dead is no problem.

Some Christians say that believing in the resurrection is not sensible in a scientific age. This is not logical. Man learning to do science, does not change God, or limit what he can do. Scientific study by man cannot take away God’s power to raise the dead.

Many scientists assume that miracles cannot happen. Not surprisingly, they find no evidence of God in the universe. However, assuming what you are trying to prove is not logical.

A television reporter asked a rationalist if he believed in God. That rationalist said that we have been looking round the universe for a long time, but have not found God, so he must not exist. That is not logical. First of all, many people have found him. More importantly, the fact that something has not been found does not prove that it does not exist; just that it has not been found. Many things exist that have not yet been found. Fortunately, God can be found by those who seek him sincerely.

God exists
Jesus is risen
Faith is logical

What is God like?

2025-09-17T16:41:00.001+12:00

Some would say that he is a retributive judge, who cannot forgive unless the penalty for sin has been paid.

Others would say that he is kind, forgiving and merciful.

The first view is not even an Old Testament portrayal of. Ezekiel 18:24-32 tells a different story of God’s justice.

If a wicked person turns away from the wickedness they have committed and does what is just and right, they will save their life. Because they consider all the offenses they have committed and turn away from them, that person will surely live; they will not die. Yet the Israelites say, ‘The way of the Lord is not just.’ Are my ways unjust, people of Israel? Is it not your ways that are unjust (Ezek 18:27-29)?

If the person turns from their wickedness, they will live. Their wickedness will no longer be held against them, but will be forgotten. The Israelites said that this was unjust, but God disagreed. He said they were unjust, so they did not understand God’s justice.

At the end of the prophet’s message, God makes his attitude clear.

Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD (Ezek 18:31-32).

God does not want people to die for their sins. He wants to give them a new heart and a new spirit. He does not take pleasure in people being punished.

If we look at the life of Jesus, the answer to the question above is obvious. When he met ordinary, broken people he did not demand that they face retribution for their sins. He did not say that the had to pay the price of justice before he could forgive them and heal them.
When the leper to him asking for mercy, he reached and touched him. He then healed him (Mark 1:40-41). Jesus forgave the sin of the paralysed man who was lowered through the roof (Mark 2:5,11-12). He did not require him to meet the demands of justice first.

Imagine this end to the parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:11-31).

While the lost son was still a long way off, his father saw him, and sent a servant to explain that he wanted to forgive him, but that he would have to repay the debt he owed before he could do so.

This does not have the same ring as the parable that Jesus told.

Imagine this ending to the parable.

While the lost son was still a long way off, his father saw him. He wanted to forgive him, but he couldn’t until the debt was paid. So, the father called the older son and demanded that he pay the debt that his brother owned. When the son had repaid the debt at considerable cost, the father welcomed the lost son that he had never stopped loving.

This does not make sense, but it is what many Christians preach.

Paul explained what God has done in his letter to the Romans.

All are put right freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus (Rom 3:24).

This redemption came freely by his grace.

He did this to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his restraint God passed over the sins previously committed—he did it to demonstrate his righteousness at the present time (Romans 3:25-26).

God chose to pass over sins committed beforehand. He was happy to forgive, because this demonstrated his righteousness.

Some preachers say that God demands propitiation for sin, ie his wrath has to be satisfied. That is not true. It is the spiritual powers of evil who had to be propitiated, because humans had let them grab authority over the earth from them.

I never had to propitiate my father, ie give him a gift to calm down his wrath. Everyone would agree that a son who had to propitiate the anger of his father with a gift had a terrible father.

The idea that God needs retribution for sin before he can forgive them is a distortion of his character. It is Satan who accused people and demands retribution against them. Jesus died to satisfy his demands for a ransom.

Widows Mite

2025-09-11T17:02:00.002+12:00

I get upset when I hear preachers using the example of the Widow’s Mite when attempting to raise funds for their ministry or church building programme. I explain why in Widows Mite.

Church Shambles

2025-09-05T17:29:00.002+12:00

During the first five centuries of Christian history, a number of ecumenical councils were held. Tradition says that these councils settled outstanding theological disputes. For example, the Council of Nicea in AD 325 is said to have established the doctrine of the Trinity. This is not really true. The theology of the Trinity is settled in the nature and character of God, not by human councils. Those who listen to the Spirit of God will find the truth, whereas human councils will usually arrive at a convenient compromise.

Christian historians who back the council movement identify the meeting of elders and apostles in Jerusalem that is recorded in Acts 15 as the first ecumenical council. A careful reading of the text does not support this view. This meeting was not a council that set a pattern for the church; it was actually a shambles that made unwise decisions.

The problem arose when the gospel spread to Antioch. Paul and Barnabas had a relationship with apostles and elders in Jerusalem from the time when they both lived and preached there (Acts 9:26-30). They were sent up to Jerusalem to talk to them about the problem (Acts 15:2). Several things went wrong at this council.

The shambles described in Acts 15 shows the dangers of trying to deal with problems on the mission field with church councils, committees and government. See Church Shambles.

Jesus

2025-08-29T17:04:00.001+12:00

I have been reading Matthew’s gospel again. I am struck by how central healing and deliverance from evil spirits was to his ministry.

Jesus went throughout Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom, and healing every disease and sickness among the people. News about him spread all over Syria, and people brought to him all who were ill with various diseases, those suffering severe pain, the demon-possessed, those having seizures, and the paralyzed; and he healed them (Matt 4:23-24).

When evening came, many who were demon-possessed were brought to him, and he drove out the spirits with a word and healed all the sick (Matt 8:16).

And when the men of that place recognized Jesus, they sent word to all the surrounding country. People brought all their sick to him 36 and begged him to let the sick just touch the edge of his cloak, and all who touched it were healed (Matt 14:35-36).

Then there are all the individual healings that Matthew describes in his account of Jesus ministry.

Strange Religion

2025-08-27T17:30:00.002+12:00

I have just finished reading a book called Strange Religion by Nijay Gupta. This book provides a description of Christianity in the first couple of centuries.

Nijay explains that the first Christians seemed weird to the people of Roman society. The behaviour of Christians was totally different from any religion that the Romans knew. This is why the gospel was so appealing and the church grew so fast. It was radically different and better than any other religion of the time.

When I look at the church today, the opposite seems to be the case.

Christian music seems very like secular music, with similar genres, and only the message being different.
Christian worship seems to be secular rock concerts with groups of people and similar musical instruments on the stage.
Christian schools are very similar to secular schools, with a slight difference in curriculum.
Christian seminaries function in a way that is very similar to other tertiary education institutions.
Christian political parties function in a way that is similar to other political parties.
Christian buildings don’t look much different from secular buildings.

I cannot help wondering if the gospel would be more effective, if Christian society were totally different, as in the first century.

Statistics (3) Census

2025-08-23T16:33:00.002+12:00

I see that Donald Trump has instructed the Census Bureau to undertake a new population census. According to the US Post-Enumeration Survey (PES), eight states were overcounted while six were undercounted in the 2020 population census. Trump is concerned that these discrepancies distorted representation in Congress, which is based on census numbers, but there are a couple of issues with his concern.

The biggest threat to the fairness of electoral district boundaries is gerrymandering. Successive governments from both parties have gerrymandered congressional districts to the extent that many never change hands. Introducing a fairer way to set boundaries would contribute more to fair elections than better population estimates.

The other problem is that conducting a census of the population is almost impossible in the modern world. I have explained the difficulties faced in New Zealand in a previous article.

The problems are worse in the United States, as two save money, the Census Bureau operates a postal collection for the population census. That only works well if the agency has up-to-date address lists for all citizens. However, that is not the case. When people move frequently, it is very difficult to maintain accurate address lists. Consequently, many census questionnaires are not delivered to the correct people. And if people don’t bother to post their census form back, getting a response from them is very expensive.

For these reasons, I would be surprised if Donald Trump will get a more accurate census than was achieved in 2020.

Statistics (2) Employment

2025-08-22T17:30:00.001+12:00

Trump was upset by the July 2025 payroll report (a less-than-expected monthly job add of 73,000 and a very large negative two-month revision of 258,000). He has also expressed concern that the Payroll Reports for the period leading up to the 2024 election were revised down following the election. He is correct in saying that the statistics for the last year of the Biden presidency overstated the state of the economy, but it probably did not have a huge effect on the outcome of the election (although it might have in different circumstances).

The problem is that early estimates of employment/jobs are very difficult to measure. In the United States, the payroll report is based on a survey of business establishments. This presents several difficulties. The robustness of a sample survey depends on the quality of the population frame from which the sample is selected.

The United States does not have an up-to-date register of businesses, so the sample results have to be adjusted for births and deaths of businesses. Businesses that have closed down will not respond to the survey, although they could still be in the survey. New businesses will not be included in the establishment survey because they will not be on the business register when the sample is selected. The adjustment for births and deaths can be quite large, yet they are difficult to estimate because the relative numbers depend on the stage in the business cycle.

The other problem is that funding for statistics has been cut. I read that funding for CPI surveys has been reduced, so I presume the same applies to the payroll survey as well. Getting a satisfactory response to the surveys of businesses can be difficult. There are methods that can be used to improve the response rate, but they all cost money.

In light of these difficulties, I am not surprised that the payrolls report is not as robust as commentators would like.

In New Zealand, the earliest estimates of monthly job numbers are derived from data supplied to the tax department as part of the PAYE system. There are a few issues with small businesses that have less frequent reporting requirements, but the appropriate adjustments can be estimated. But overall, the Monthly Employment Indicator is a robust statistic. It is supplemented by a quarterly survey of business establishments. The sample is selected from the business register that is kept up to date using GST registrations (value added tax), so there is less of a problem with births and deaths.