Dr Paul Allen

Inside American evangelicalism is a paradox: many of the most respected leaders use their influence to steer denominations and institutions in a direction that is significantly more liberal than the people those leaders ostensibly represent. There is no shortage of examples of this. Congregations who would reject critical race theory have CRT spoon-fed to them by their leaders. While those in the pew eschew the LGBTQ+ movement, some of the most influential evangelical pastors in the country are exposing their congregations to “affirming” curricula.  The ERLC provides a great illustration of this paradox. While the government closed churches and banned singing during COVID, the “religious liberty commission” of the Southern Baptist Convention commended court rulings siding with the government, which directly opposed the ERLC’s supposed mission and the will of many Southern Baptists. The Daily Wire’s Megan Basham wants us to know that it is not a coincidence that church leaders use their

If your hope is tied to political or cultural renewal as the evidence of Christ’s work in the world, then you will eventually find yourself in despair. The world gives us many reasons to despair. Open a news feed app or scroll through social media for even a minute and you’ll find a day’s worth of events and perspectives to grieve. Despite this, Christians ought to have an eschatology of hope. And it’s not a hope we need to conjure out of thin air. For centuries, the Church has found profound hope in the return of Christ—it’s written into our creeds. In recent centuries, the Church has argued more and more about the end times, but the bulk of our history is united on the matter, all sharing a common hope. Look at what the three creeds affirm together: The Apostles’ Creed I believe in . . .The resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen. The Nicene Creed I believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ . . .He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and his king

As much as I would like for it not to be so, the way we label things really does have an effect on the way people think. This is one of the reasons why propaganda is so effective. Call a particular group something or describe their beliefs or actions in a particular way long enough, and people will start to believe it.  For example, it is much easier to get a group of people to turn against others if you keep accusing them of being “enemies of humanity,” “on the wrong side of history,” or something of that nature. When God’s people and their Scriptures are attacked, it is often by having a label applied to them and then having that label repeated over and over again.  Want to get people to reject the Bible?   Accuse it of something that elicits an immediate emotional response, repeat the accusation long enough, and you can encourage people to reject large portions of the Bible or at least be embarrassed about certain portions of Scripture. This discussion bears on the u

While terrorists shout "death to the infidel", this morning people of goodwill will likely cry "Vive la France!" That Paris, the City of Light should again be threatened with darkness serves as a reminder that, in an age of globalisation, our way of life, for all its comforts, is never as secure nor as guaranteed as we think. Having already weathered the Charlie Hebdo attack and its related atrocities, Paris now has to deal with a collection of even more deadly outrages, which President Hollande has rightly labelled an "abomination". More than 120 people have been killed in the latest brutality, which led the authorities to immediately close France's borders and declare a state of emergency. This morning, thankfully, reports on the ground suggest that although shaken, Parisians are for the most part getting on with life. Perhaps they see normality as the best form of defiance in the face of barbarism. In Europe as in many other parts of the d

Image via Wikipedia Why Marriage is the exclusive union of a Man and a Woman  1.1 Many  Christians  will be aware of the campaign for so-called marriage “equality”.  A bill currently  before the  Australian Parliament  aims to change the current definition of marriage to allow same sex  couples to marry.  This would represent a radical revision of the public understanding of marriage as a  social institution, and a radical challenge to the Christian understanding of marriage. Federal  Parliamentarians  have been asked to “gauge their constituents’ views on ways to achieve equal  treatment for same sex couples including marriage”. 1.2 What are our views as Christians on this issue? And why should we engage in the political  debate?  This paper seeks to answer these questions, setting out the case in favour of retaining the  current  Federal law  which defines marriage as the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all  others, voluntarily entered into for life. The paper has four