I was a little disappointed by your conclusion though… it’s a very strong and potentially hurtful statement to say that “I cannot in all conscience recommend fellowship with Hillsong”. Although I know you personally are balanced and fair, you must realise statements like that are bound to be very divisive. It seems that most of your criticisms relate to the preaching of the (mostly guest) speakers at a single conference (and visiting a ‘few times’). I thought I’d share my thoughts on that, for what they are worth!

1- Hillsong Conference is aimed at church leaders- its not an outreach conference. I’m not saying that church leaders don’t need to hear the gospel, but there was probably a lot of assumed knowledge in this case.

2- I can’t agree with you that Hillsong doesn’t teach the gospel- they do it all the time whenever I’ve been there! There is also legitimate debate to be had about how sharing the gospel can/should be done. Personally, I find the way Hillsong does this (a separate mini-sermon with ‘sinners prayer’ at almost every service I’ve been to) to be more natural and helpful in many ways than the weave-the-gospel-message-into-every-sermon-no-matter-how-forced method.

3- I’m surprised that you seem to overloook the potential of songs as teaching tools- its a (rightly) proud tradition of Sydney Evangelicals that singing is meant to teach and instruct. I know that singing isn’t for everyone… but although I can’t remember much about last weeks sermon, I will have ‘Beneath the Waters’ running through my head all day now.

4- I think the difference between Hillsong Conference and weekly church services are more significant than you have assumed. I don’t want to play the ‘I’ve been to Hillsong more often than you” card- but I also think that visiting a few times is not really a strong enough basis on which to draw that conclusion.

5- Hillsong do some amazing things in terms of social action- and I’m usually very cynical about these types of things. A small example among many is the quadriplegic patient I worked with (who is now in heaven)- he spent most of his day in bed, and Hillsong Citycare were the only people who visited him. Contrast that to the time my Mum tried to arrange guys from our Anglican church to visit a quadriplegic patient of hers- and NO-ONE responded. I think you were too dismissive of this in your comment- Jesus is very strong in his teaching that the fruits of our faith will be shown in how we love the disadvantaged, and I see a huge gap between what the Hillsong movement does and the culture of Sydney Evangelicals. Seeing the gospel-in-action stuff that goes on through the work of Hillsong has been the single biggest encouragement in my Christian walk over the last few years.

6- I agree that careful study of the Bible isn’t a strong part of what Hillsong offers in their sermons- and that this is an area for growth. I’m not sure whether people that attend Hillsong would have a deep/thorough academic understanding of the Bible unless they were personally motivated to study this e.g. at their college or in their small groups. However, the talks I’ve been to at Colour Conference have been the biggest inspiration for me to read my Bible that I’ve had in a long time.

If I were to write the article, my conclusion would have been different. I think Hillsong have changed a lot in the last 10 years, and they very strongly and clearly proclaim the gospel- in their songs, many of their talks, in a separate gospel presentation during weekly church services, and in their actions in the community. The events and services I’ve attended clearly show they love the Bible and Jesus. Although I’d advise a person to make sure they are studying the Bible in addition to listening to sermons, and listening to guest speakers with a loving but careful ear (which we should be anyway), I’d not hesitate in recommending Hillsong to someone looking for a church.

You mentioned some friends who were worried about portraying Hillsong in a positive light. I can understand that. Clearly there are often ‘good Christians’ in such churches. Clearly there are positive things they do and say. But it makes me think of my favourite Matthias media product: the Blueprint.

The paper on Jesus’ death speaks about not approaching God on the basis of experience, but on the basis of Jesus’ death. We may be dealing with Christians who mean to honour Jesus, believe in him and his death, but don’t believe in the fully articulated view of Jesus’ substitionary death on the cross as the only way to make us right with God. And so, the paper says, we are led to have fellowship with people who have a different view of the cross and redemption (however sincere their motives). The fact that Jesus and his death (the gospel) were hardly mentioned from the public platform is clearly indicative of this.

This leads me not to want to promote Hillsong at all. That’s not to say there might not be positives about them. After all we can plunder the Egyptians! That is, if pagans have good things to say and teach us, how much more our brothers and sisters at Hillsong. But I still would not want to promote a ministry that is based on the ‘experience’ box/ approach to God, rather than the Bible. There’s plenty of good Evangelical music out there.

Finally, for those who point out our own mistakes, of which there are many – that’s just a furfie masquerading as humility. The important thing is whether a ministry/ church has the Bible as their supreme authority. Do we approach God on the basis of the substitionary death of Jesus, not on the basis of experience? Of course we are sinful and make many mistakes. But we’re not comparing like with like: Evangelical with Evangelical. We’re comparing experientialists with Evangelicals. The warning is necessary, and greatly appreciated.