This quote seems very applicable to Hillsong and indeed all of what is usually called "religion".

All "religion" is a theatrically-conceived magic-show of suggestive ideas and make-believe performances, specifically intended to divert, entertain, and (either with or without mutual agreement and consent) DECEIVE. Although the institutionalized justification for the playful deception is the compassionate-rationalization that it makes people FEEL better.

All "religion" is a playful effort to console by means of deception---much as parents do with young children (by exercising the faculties of fantasy, until the child "grows up", and inevitably, and RIGHTLY, ceases to believe in the nursery stories of childhood's time of nurturing).

The proposing of "religious" myths and illusions has a traditional function in the domain of childhood---but the world of truly and responsibly adult life requires a mature and truly civilized culture, founded in Reality Itself.

The thus culture of illusionism is the culture of make-believe, engaged for the purpose of pacifying primitive of infantile human emotions, and, especially, the infantile fear of death.

All illusionists voluntarily and strategically deceive others, and even themselves, on the basis of a culturally-ingrained acceptance of the principle (and a categorical presumption of the inherent moral rightness) of the compassionate-rationalization---such that they are willing and able to believe and act AS IF doing FALSELY is doing GOOD.

All who believe in such illusions and therefore accept illusions as "objectively real", VOLUNTEER to be thus tricked and deluded. And they do so for their own, usually uninspected, reasons, but, in general, because it makes them FEEL better in the midst of the suffering that is the usual human condition.

"Religion" is mental, emotional and physical method, or an ego-based strategy for seeking what has presumed to be lost, absent, or not yet attained.

"Religion", characteristically, seeks its proposed goal by means of the efforts of the social ego---and those means are most characteristically, the performance of "religiously"-idealized social virtues, and other, often sex=paranoid, or moralistically, and even puritanically, conceived behaviours.

"Religion" is a form of pious but nonetheless childish consumerism, full of posturing, bargain-hunting, haggling, and deceitful practices of all kinds, whereby the presumed separate self, or the client-like ego-"I", whether as an individual or socially-defined cultural collective, seeks to acquire what, from the egoic and psycho-physical point of view, is desired, or whatever "objectively"-defined condition, thing, or state the proprietary "God" can provide to satisfy the always wanting-demanding ego-"I" itself.

The "religious" form of the consumer ego wants and seeks, as if in a marketplace, what it can beg, take, somehow earn, or otherwise acquire from the presumed storeowning-shopkeeper "God".

The consumer ego uses "religious" means to seek and demand what the parent-like "God" can do for the alternately childish and otherwise adolescent ego-"I" in the midst of its vulnerable and unsatisfactory conditions of life. "God" thus becomes the presumed executive-supplier, manager, middleman, and hoarder of the desired commodities or "goods".

Sorry Ho Hum.

But Ho hum.

If you havent had first hand experience of The Holy Spirit at work you dont know what you are talking about.

You need to get into a lively christian church and watch... and let God touch you.

Thats real life experience.

Then you can testify.

I'd prefer my kids be inside Hillsong than inside Long Bay jail.

Just what is first hand experience of the holy spirit, Gibo? Ho Hum has pretty well ruled out accepting anything on face value, or unquestioningly believing something taught at an impressionable age.

As a child I went to many church services and never had this 'experience' you mention. Many years later I attended a pentecostal service (the preacher, observing I wasn't talking in tongues like the rest of the crowd, even tried to convert me there and then. Fortunately, I didn't hyperventilate and pass out like some others did) and still didn't take anything from it, except the realisation people believe the strangest things sometimes.

No Gibo, either you're a believer or you're not. There's a god gene some of us simply don't have.

That said, it doesn't mean we don't lack a moral compass, as Truthnow78 smugly suggests. It does mean we reject supernaturalism. THAT's 'real life'.

How strange that Andrew Prior can recognise and repudiate the massive con job carried out by the evangelical churches but still describes himself as a Christian. Perhaps in another article he could try and identify any logical and empirical reasons to believe in established Christian doctrine which don't also count as reasons to believe in Hillsong? Those wicked Fundamentalists who act as if the Bible (or the Koran) is true are just following the precepts of their faith. Exodus 22:18, for instance, says quite clearly: 'You shall not suffer a witch to live', so if you haven't had a potshot at a Wiccan today then you're not taking the whole thing seriously enough.

Re the comments: I agree with Gibo that personal revelation trumps any amount of reasoning and logic, but I would like to know how he distinguishes his own case from that of the schizophrenics who are convinced that the CIA are controlling their minds via radio waves. Their personal experience is pretty convincing too. If the only touchstone of truth is personal experience, then how can anyone ever be wrong?

And Bennie's 'god gene' theory doesn't explain why roughly 150 Australians every day -- according the the Census -- are renouncing belief in any religion. Maybe the lessons learnt at Hillsong are spreading to the wider community after all.

bennie,


I agree, I was exposed to 5 years of Christian education, to no effect. The Nobel Laureate Peter Medawar is supposed to have said that he "didn't have the gene for religion",there's probably some truth in this idea as some people believe against all reason and others are total materialists. What are Church services really, other than ritual magic?

TRUTHNOW78,

If you're implying that religion is necessary for morality, you are wrong, this idea is easily refuted.

The gods of men are many and varied, but they are still all myths and legends. Men prescribed that Christ was divine, but then Christ himself was not a christian (and given christian creed and history he definitely wouldn't countenance such a belief). Imagine what he would have said if some christian idiot proclaimed: "your mother was a virgin, your father was the holy spirit and you step-father was Jehovah"?? That would be treated as blasphemy. But each to their own, many people will believe anything after they're indocrinated.

Ho Hum and Bennie you are correct, I have been in many churches around the world,I definately do not get the spiritual vibes as mentioned in another E-mail, the only thing I can think of, especially the old churches of Europe, being the amount of poor people who built these palaces of worship, mainly for the rich of the time, and how many lost their lives in doing so, if you wish to pray to your god what is wrong with saying a few words to him in your garden, I am sure it would be as uplifting as going to Hillsong for a social gathering.
Any thing to do with mass hypnotism at the pulpit and music that is so sweet generally in tune with the minister is corrupt, how people can start falling all over the place, or believing in some unseen God is beyond me, no I don't intend visiting Hillsong and never will, some of us are not so gullible.
Just as many spiritual people including ministers end up in jail, it is like the Pope condemning Homosexuals when he has more than he can handle in his flock.

Babies inside mothers wombs are a lot safer at Hillsong than at Public schools and universities. This article says little except that the author seems to envy the success of many who attend Hillsong. You would think Andrew would spend his time trying to sort out the mess the Uniting church is in rather than be critical of other Christian groups who seem to be a lot more Biblically based than his own.

Interesting Article:

"Some streams of Christian expression especially need to hear this. Where an emphasis is placed on "signs and wonders" as indicators of God's reality and presence, there will always be a temptation to force God to perform."

I rather think ALL streams of Christian expression need to hear this.

But of course.. had the author of the book believed in the Lord Jesus HimSELF.. rather than the Hillsong church.. she would have ended up looking for a different fellowship rather than ending up as a ROBERT from olo.

Shallow Christianity is unsustainable. Jesus never taught it.. his words

"If any man would follow me.. let him DENY himself and take up his CROSS daily and come after me. Anyone who loves mother or father or sister or brother more than me is not worthy of me, anyone who is ashamed of me in this life, I will be ashamed of him in the next, for what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses his soul"

It's not exactly happy clappy material! The beautiful reality though is that ONCE you come through that door.. you enter a paradise beyond description.. but there's no easy way in. It will cost you your heart, mind and will.

The simple solution to 'happy clappy' shallow Chrisianity and distortions that sometimes I find HillSong to be...(not in all things, but in some) is.. READ YOUR BIBLE for goodness sake.. from Matthew to Revelation.. all of it.. withOUT some one standing over your shoulder telling you what it means.. let the Holy Spirit teach you initially.

Then.. you can go deeper with help on matters like background..archeology.. textual matters etc..

HillSong and many others will come.. be and go.. but the Body of Christ will remain 4ever.

TRUTHNOW78: Hillsong or jail. Now I know that religion limits thinking...but is it really that bad?
Back to reality, studies show the reverse. Religion goes part and parcel with criminality and mental illness. Not 1:1, just statistically linked.
Gibo. I've had the "experience" but it was doing maths and relating it to nature that brought it on. Epiphanies occur no matter what your culture. It is what you do with them that counts. I could *never* renounce my atheism as it is reinforced every day by living!

To any agnostics still not comfortable you may be pleased to learn that one of the biggest "religions" is actually athiest at heart.
Buddha's ideas assume no God. For this reason his teachings are hard to practice, but make more sense as you practice more. I am not a Buddhist (I just happen to have came to many of the same conclusions), but none of the ideas clash with science or common everyday experience so you can consume them with safety and decide for yourself.
Christianity's version of "Love" seems to drive people mad. They either turn hateful or just partition their minds into insanity.

When the premise of what you believe is based on untruths and spin-magic anything is possible. Once you lay the foundation for power that comes through religious authority the path to corruption is open. And no I am not offering that all religious leaders are corrupt just that the ground is fertile and the conditions ripe for those that might take advantage of their power.

Many bizarre sects have arisen from Christianity, the leaders of which have their own agendas and usually it is far from the idea of "God" that most moderate Christians would hold and lies more in power, wealth and sometimes perverseness.

runner, I know many Catholics who have had abortions and many other of various religious faiths. One girl I knew at university had three abortions because she was more afraid of God's law about contraception and her parents finding out she had sex than about abortion. People will use any rationale sometimes to support their actions. This girl would have done better psychologically had she been not so indoctrinated in the first place.

Pelican, surely if this girl was concerned about God's law against contraception (as you referred to it), she would have been equally concerned about God's laws against fornication and abortion?

You did, however, hit the nail on the head when you mentioned her fears about what her parents would say. Obviously Catholicism was her parents' religion rather than hers - it worked for them, so they assumed that it must work for her and consequently forced it upon her. That sort of indoctrination (or evangelisation, perhaps) is a key problem with many religious people.

I, personally, am a Catholic. Catholicism works for me and I am content with its rules, practices and beliefs. That doesn't mean I am indoctrinated or that I am a mindless drone - it just means that, on close investigation, I found something I am happy with. While I was baptised as a child, my parents always offered me an escape clause: if I didn't like it, I didn't have to follow it. If I became a Methodist, a Buddhist, a Muslim, a Mormon, or if I rejected religion altogether, it would have been fine. As I came across friends who were atheist, Buddhist, Muslim, Hindu, or agnostic, they were welcoming and so was I. Consequently, I am happy. I have explored beliefs, questioned them and worked with them. Will I force my children to become active Catholics, or to believe anything in particular? Certainly not.

What I'm getting at is this: religious people aren't necessarily weak or feeble. They aren't necessarily critical or hateful of others. I work within my own system of belief and let others work within theirs. If I believe something, I follow it. But I don't judge others who don't believe it.

Otonko
I wasn't offering that her reasoning was rational - just the opposite. Perhaps you are right in she may have been more fearful of her parents than anything else although she presented herself as of Catholic faith. But again that may have been more a result of her parent's influence.

"What I'm getting at is...: religious people aren't necessarily weak or feeble. They aren't necessarily critical or hateful of others. I work within my own system of belief and let others work within theirs. If I believe something, I follow it. But I don't judge others who don't believe it."

Otonko, I agree with this statement to some extent and I am pleased that there are many religious people like you. OLO has tended to attract some religious folk who are far less egalitarian or open-minded. Unfortunately religion as a whole tends to promulgate the view that theirs is the one true religion. There are often many prejudices against those who might put forward a different view. As a Catholic I am sure you must have met with other Catholics who believe that only Catholics go to heaven and Anglicans are heretics.

I have an issue when these prejudices play out in society and affect the lives of other people. Many of my friends are religious and are not weak or feeble nor are they any more moral or compassionate than others merely by virtue of their beliefs.

Religion has been around for centuries and is very much part of the fabric of our society so for someone to declare themselves religious is hardly out of the norm nor could it be considered weak or feeble in that context.

Otherwise as you say, people should be free to take comfort in their beliefs if they choose but it is never as simple as this. I remember going to a Mormon (breakaway group) wedding years ago where the pastor/priest/rector (?) used the ceremony to castigate members of the congregation who did not 'fear' God. It was terrible and I know this is just one bad example but unfortunately it happens.

I understand exactly what you say, Pelican. And I grinned to myself when you mentioned the at times bigoted beliefs of many of my fellow Catholics. Every Sunday at Church I get the feeling that I am looked down upon by many others because:
a) I'm young
b) I go alone (what sort of family must I come from?!!)
c) after many, many years, I still don't know all the words I'm meant to say, or sing.
If they look down on me - some with pitying eyes, others with distrust - what must they think of my Anglican mother? Sadly, these people had their beliefs forced upon them, and know no other way. Furthermore, they know of no reason to find any other way.

A couple of questions:

The Catholic church demands proof of miracles performed before formal canonisation. Aside from Hillsong - is this 'signs and wonders' or 'magic'? And what of those miracles proclaimed in the Gospel?

(perhaps the trouble here is unlocking the true meaning of scripture... Perhaps in our Literalism we misunderstand?? The question is worth asking...)

This is not an attack on Catholicism-although personally I think most saints are never recognised by the Catholic church as an institution...

But it is just to show that such beliefs are 'in the mainstream' of Christianity...

I believe it best to combine appreciation of 'transcendential' phenomena - with scientific method on the other hand - with intent of discovering natural law - and anything that may be beyond natural law.

We need BOTH - as How can we understand free will AND consciousness except as transcending the material principles of cause and effect? This alone should be enough to make us consider God more seriously - and with an open mind.

We shouldn't dismiss that we cannot understand. Gallileo was condemned by the Roman Catholic authorities in his time...The frontiers of science were curtailed - because the escelesiastical authorities could not accept what they did not yet understand...

Dare I say today we need consider the opposite...Secular materialism denies that which cannot be observed so as to comprise natural and material laws of cause and effect.

I do not deny the Holy Spirit. As a Christian I long to appreciate God as much as my limited faculties enable me to. I long for a peace of mind that the World alone does not provide.

My argument with church institutions, though, is that so many do not attempt to reveal the true meaning of mysteries-most of which I believe-are not meant to be taken as Literal.

Those who are seeking 'spiritual truth' need more than fear-although probably there is much in the world that warrants fear...

We could do with truth,understanding,wisdom: and rather than hiding behind mystery - those in the position to do so should reveal its meaning....

Unlike some I don't believe churches should be banned but do believe with good cause that the favoured position of churches should be revoked. There are far too many 'American styled’ cynical corporately operated churches abusing the law.
The law as it stands is unable to distinguish between those whose purposes are to minister to the people who have the need or those that treat the law as a licence to print money and indulge in power plays perverting public policy for the benefit of their controlling groups. Including outrageously extravagant lifestyles while emotionally manipulating the poor to donate.
I would argue that they should be treated as the Corporations that they in reality are. This would include Tax and having the same reporting requirements, disclosures and legal obligations.
Hillsong is one clear example.

Porky: << Anyone who loves mother or father or sister or brother more than me is not worthy of me... >>

I think that anybody who "loves" a guy who's been dead for a couple of thousand years more than their family "is not worthy" of having one.

hear, hear.

Yes CJ.. on the surface that sounds even reasonable.

I'm surprise you didn't come up with the "But look at what the Church put in Jesus mouth so they could use this to force compliance and mindless obedience"....that's usually a good standby.

But of course..for those who have read the Gospels and grasped their content, and as a result met the risen Lord.. and experienced His grace.... well.. they view things differently.

The point of course, in me using those 'hard' sayings of Jesus was to illustrate that happy clappy, cheap and shallow pseudo animistic Christianity will have a very predictable result.

This article on Hillsong reviewing a book from a disgruntled parishioner is interesting. The reviewer has obviously never been a long time attendee. The lessons taught at Hillsong, are constantly derived from both the Old and New Testament, and delivered with flair and passion. People are encouraged to bring their own Bible, and the message is essentially exactly the same as that delivered by the Anglican Church, and I have no doubt the Presbyterian Church as well.

While the Anglican, Presbyterian and Roman Catholic Churches are losing weekly attendees, Hillsong continues to attract regular crowds, in all of its services throughout Sydney. No one makes anyone attend. They come because the services are fun, the music is great, and the quality of the pastors is superb. The Word is delivered by both men and women. Husband and wife teams are the norm, and women at Hillsong are honoured and immensely appreciated.

On top of that the very best preachers in the world come as guest speakers. They come not just for conferences, although the three major conferences attract very interesting speakers, weekend services often have the worlds very best evangelical speakers, with their own special message. Outsiders concentrate on the money involved, but the Church itself concentrates on the welfare and spiritual health of its many members. It thrives because it is all about people, not money.

The common law of all Christians is the New Testament, and the system introduced by Jesus Christ replaced the Roman System where the State was the Church. The second temptation of Jesus Christ was when Pontius Pilate offered him citizenship of Rome. That meant repudiating Almighty God and accepting Caesar as god. Jesus preferred death to dishonour. Nature abhors a vacuum, and the mainstream Churches have left a vacuum. They fill at Easter and Christmas, christenings, weddings and funerals, but they have failed to educate their flocks on the benefits of Christianity, in each and everyone’s daily lives. The States have filled that void by becoming “churches”. The Priests of the State Church are lawyers, and Parliaments are treated as their nine gods

',I think that anybody who "loves" a guy who's been dead for a couple of thousand years more than their family "is not worthy" of having one.;

And yet those who do love the Resurrected life are far more likely to be faithful to their wives, children and enemies.

another point re: 'Testing God'...

If God did not want us to ask for anything, why then are there passages in the scripture which suggest that all you ask of the Father in the name of the Son will be granted?

For me, it is hard to grasp... Sometimes the scripture seems contradictory - or otherwise misinterpreted...

For instance, it is suggested in Revealtions that ALL one asks of the Father in the name of the Son will be granted...

Elsewhere it is suggested that one must be a 'Friend' of Jesus for this to be granted.

And elsewhere again, it is suggested that it is a matter of faith - that all you truly believe will be granted - that you ask for - will be so...

Regardless of confusion, though, the scripture does - one way or another - seem to invite us to ask things of the Father in the name of the Son...

Is this 'testing the Lord'?

And why should we not ask for that which is merciful, gracious and just? And if we suffer - what is there left if we give in on our prayers being answered? How to persevere without hope?

Holding on to hope in prayer - I don't believe this is 'testing the Lord' in any sense forbidden.

Porky: << I'm surprise you didn't come up with the "But look at what the Church put in Jesus mouth so they could use this to force compliance and mindless obedience"....that's usually a good standby.

But of course..for those who have read the Gospels and grasped their content, and as a result met the risen Lord.. and experienced His grace.... well.. they view things differently. >>

Of course, any rational person knows that you've only "met the risen Lord" in your fertile imagination. However, with respect to the claptrap about being unworthy unless you love Jesus before your family, this is of course precisely the kind of nonsense by which your Brethren cousins separate their apostates from their families, isn't it?

While Hillsong is a reprehensible and quite scary organisation, at least they don't appear to be in the practice of splitting up families like your mob does.

runner: << ...those who do love the Resurrected life are far more likely to be faithful to their wives, children and enemies >>

Fascinating. I don't have any "enemies", but I'm quite intrigued as to how I would be "faithful" to them if I did. Also, are you suggesting that fundy Christians are never unfaithful to their wives? Tell that to the TV evangelists who are regularly being exposed for their sexual indiscretions, and upon whom the Hillsong business is clearly modelled.

CJ Morgan

Fascinating. I don't have any "enemies", but I'm quite intrigued as to how I would be "faithful" to them if I did.'

Christ is faithful to the unfaithful in that He shed His blood for the ungrateful and god haters. Your tolerance level of those with a different viewpoint to your own makes it hard to believe you have no 'enemies'. I suppose it depends on your definition of enemy. I would define being faithful to your enemy as wanting what is best for them and doing what you can to see that taking place (albeit a poor definition). Christians don't see people as their enemies. It is the spiritual forces of darkness that deceive people with false philosophies that are our enemy. The people are just the vessels that carry out the evil ones plans.

'Also, are you suggesting that fundy Christians are never unfaithful to their wives? Tell that to the TV evangelists who are regularly being exposed for their sexual indiscretions, and upon whom the Hillsong business is clearly modelled'.

There are plenty of believers that have been unfaithful to their wives. Having been in church life and secular life I assure you it is at a lot lower rate within biblical believing churches than in the community. I can't say the same for the liberal churches where almost anything goes. Hopefully those falling in this sin are truely repentant and find God's forgiveness.

Andrew Prior, joining the ranks of Hillsong critics.

No church or any human institution is going to be perfect, and neither Hillsong nor the pentecostal churches in Australia consider themselves above criticism. Yet, Andrew, if you’re going to criticise, could you at least point to something substantial.

The pentecostal churches in Australia have always had their finger pointers and antagonists. They are duly ignored. The church has a mandate to do a job and wants to get on with it. It’s easy to snipe from afar.

As for Levin’s book, I haven’t read it so I can’t say too much, but I’ve heard that her only real beef with Hillsong is that it is too focussed on selling a product. Yet I see Levin is selling her book at the ABC Shop (or are they giving them away for free?)

That Levin gets the ABC to sell and promote her book gives a pretty good clue as to whose side she’s on.

Our education system is so flawed that the usefulness of Christianity to everyday living is concealed and hidden. Hillsong and the Pentecostal Churches, are filling the gap left in the education of people by the State Church which today controls the education agenda, and pushes its secular barrow.

Those who talk of a “guy who died two thousand years ago”, are exposing their ignorance. Jesus Christ was crucified, but rose from the dead, and despite his ascencion into Heaven forty days after he was resurrected, promised as was foretold in the Old Testament, to remain with us and live and work among us until the second coming. As an institution of continuing and further education Hillsong Church and its similarly classified Pentecostal Churches, some of whom are even Anglican, are all singularly successful. Christianity is for everyday use.

The Spirit of Jesus Christ, the Holy Ghost, only works on request, and prayer is necessary. In response to prayer, gifted and blessed individuals do the things Almighty God wants them to do. Jesus Christ fulfilled the promise he made in the Gospel of Matthew 18 Verses 15-20 by having the Parliament of the United Kingdom in 1297, pass the statute, called the Magna Carta. Only Barons and Churchmen could read in 1297, but the principles of the Holy Bible were extended to all and sundry by Statute. It was ordained to be read in every Church in England, four times a year, so that everyone, educated or not, understood its meaning. To this very day, an application to the Supreme ( God’s) Court is called a prayer. Until the pagans abolished the Supreme Court in 1970, in New South Wales and established a System as used in every dictatorship, the Holy Trinity, Father / Justice, Son/Jury, and Holy Spirit, weighed all prayers in the balance, and if the prayer was just, the promise in the Lord’s Prayer, was fulfilled by the verdict of a jury. His will was done on Earth, as it is in heaven, by a Christian Sheriff. By bringing the Word, or Light, Hillsong is changing the world

I humbly confess that runner, Peter the Believer and the rest of the credulous crew are right about the Risen Lord, and I've been wrong all along. Now that I've finally found Him, I realise He's been here all along - albeit hiding on top of the bookcase:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_YLH6-GEUQuU/SW0qQaltT_I/AAAAAAAAA5s/Rx_0bZyJLoE/s1600-h/funny-pictures-your-cat-has-found-jesus.jpg

[Courtesy of Pavlov's Cat]

I once had a Judge mock the Lord, in quite unequivocal terms. On a trip to Paris he died in his bed. He was not very old, and missed out on his three score years and ten. If the Workplace Health and Safety mob ever did a survey of the most dangerous jobs in Australia it would ban Judges and Magistrates. So many die in office, or get invalided out.

Since Judges and Magistrates have replaced Father O'Reilly as Priest Confessor, and instead of confidentially taking confessions take them out in the Open Court, without ever offering the basic right to forgiveness for the first offence, provided the offender repented genuinely, their job has become dangerous. They are rightly fearful, and in response, have installed human security. The best security they could get would be to regularly attend Hillsong, and rely on the Lord.

Pierre Schlag, lecturer at Denver Colorado University, http://stripe.colorado.edu/~schlag/publications.html
describes Judges as the most violent people in any community. Since Newtons First Law of Physics is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, then as they inflict violence, so shall they receive it. As any thinking man or woman will realize, as Christianity has declined violence has increased. Judges and Magistrates split families, inflict enormous pain on families and scar them all for life. They could all avoid this sinful behavior if only they stopped worshipping their political masters, and obeyed the Christian Statutes designed to save their souls. A start would be to regularly attend Hillsong Church, but a weekly session in any Anglican Church, and a healthy respect for the Word of the Lord, read regularly would help them enormously.

The violence inflicted upon Judges and Magistrates is not inflicted by men. It is inflicted by their own internal conscience, and the feeling that like Judas Iscariot, they have sold their soul to the State for thirty pieces of silver. Look at Justice Kirby: at seventy he looks ninety. Look at the Late Great Lionel Murphy. He was one of the best High Court Justices ever, but died at 60

"But of course.. had the author of the book believed in the Lord Jesus HimSELF.. rather than the Hillsong church.. she would have ended up looking for a different fellowship rather than ending up as a ROBERT from olo."

Or perhaps David, if you got out a bit more, thought about the idea of who is head of the church and just how vile a lot of what continues to happen within it you to might follow in my footsteps.

Hillsong is a symptom of a missing or neglegent head. Your failure to examine the evidence or reach the same conclusion as I have from the evidence does not equate to belief in a particular church.

The church has some great people but as an organisation which is supposedly headed but an all knowing, all powerfull and just being it's an abject failure.

If the example of Acts 5:1-13 was a bit more common I might have cause to rethink my views on the role of Jesus in the church.

R0bert

Peter, I wasn't aware that we had a State Church.

The Hillsong people encourage their members to read the Holy Bible for themselves. The pastors do their very best to make the study interesting, and connect the dots, so that the bigger picture can be seen. Ottokonoko and Onnanoko alike are encouraged to work out the plan Almighty God has for them, and many claim that the words spoken by the pastors are directly applicable to their daily lives.

Why are we members of a State church? Because the Parliament in 1924 decided to make us members and force us to vote for the National Synod called Parliament. The system of Government adopted by Australia remains pure Anglican, with the Queen as head of the Church, Head of the Army, and Head of the Law and Parliament, not because She is a person, but because She was ordained in a ceremony at Westminster Abbey in 1953 to represent Almighty God as Sovereign.

Church and State under Roman Governments were one and the same. English Law is an exception. The English separated Church power and State power, in the Magna Carta in 1297, and reinforced the separation of powers in 1640 in the Habeas Corpus Act 1640 16 Charles 1 Ch X. A war followed and in 1688 a King and Queen who would retain the Separation of Powers, were installed. Jury trial was the cornerstone of English law, Protestant Christianity , and their and our Constitution. Its abolition for forty years is an aberration that must be corrected.

In 1970, New South Wales enacted a law to give lawyers absolute power, just like the Roman Governments in Spain, and elsewhere. The English would not allow a lawyer/priest representing God ( Queen) to exercise power, except on the verdict of a jury.

In 1970, the State of New South Wales became a Church State, and a committee of lawyer/priests makes all the law that matters. Instead of One God/Sovereign , we have nine Parliaments all claiming to be Sovereign/Gods appointing Judges. The lawyers they allow to practice, Judges and Magistrates are their merciless enforcers. Church and “Court” and State are one.

TRUTHNOW78: I'd much prefer my kid to be in Long Bay Gaol than in Hillsong. He'd stand more chance of emerging psychologically intact.

Well there aint no tellin how some people think. Psychologically intact after a stint in Long Bay Gaol. Whew, how some people hate to admit someone else may be doing some good. Even an atheist Pommy Journalist admitted in the Times that the Christian systems are working in Africa. The ABCD that Christianity teaches has turned around the Aids epidemic in many communities. Of course unless you went to Hillsong you would not know. A stands for Aids, B stands for belief in chastity, commitment and monogamy. C stands for Christ, and D stands for Death.

The really sad thing about Africa is the majority of victims are women and it is rape, not consensual sex that gives them aids. You never see a Hillsong Girl drunk in the pub. You never see the young people doing anything but dancing, singing, and having a great time. all without the benefit or curse of alcohol. One of our pastors said she was surprised when her parents opposed her committment to Hillsong.

She had thought they would be pleased she did not do bongs any more, get drunk and throw up under the table in a pub, or wind up in some strangers bed with no memory of what had happened. Hillsong turns lives around, by teaching the fundamentals of living, healing the wounded and abused and extending a hand of friendship to all who come to Jesus Christ.

Hillsong does not judge people, and the whole of Australia would be a better place, if it realised that judging another is a deadly sin. In fact judgment is reserved for God Almighty, He gave it to Jesus Christ in the New Testament,and Jesus Christ gave it to the Holy Spirit. Christianity differs from all other religions, as the Lex Misericordiae, the Law of Mercy. Judge not that ye be not judged. Get that Mr Magistrate.You can give people Christian juries.

On my fundamental belief that "by their deeds shall they be known", I have found Hillsong folk to display some of the least objectionable traits of any brand of Christianity. Right up there with the Salvos, in fact.

I know quite a few, by the way. They are mostly young, invariably bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, and have a significantly positive outlook on life. As employees (I have employed three in the past two years, to my knowledge) they are diligent and honest. All had church- and/or charity-related activities that they conduct in their spare time.

None has attempted to proselytise, but at the same time none has hidden their allegiance. I haven't heard one word about the evil of other religions, not a syllable against Islam. Nor has any discussed the inner workings of their church, or expressed concern that they might be somehow being ripped off.

I speak as I find. As far as I am concerned, if someone needs religion as part of their emotional support mechanism, Hillsong represents one of its least harmful manifestations.

Like Bennie, I have attended pentecostal church services, didn't quite fit in as I never could speak in tongues. I don't think I have ever experienced holy spirit. But still I believe in Jesus and have found a more traditional church to go to.

To believe is to think something is true (with reasons). The behaviours of other Christians would not and should not be a factor that affects my belief.

I think different churches suit different personalities. That's alright by me.

The other day I heard a non-Christian saying Hillsong has many attractive chicks. I'm excited about that.
One day I would like to attend Hillsong church, to have some fun. But I suspect Hillsong is not for me in the long run.

Hillsong Church is an amazing place for a number of reasons. It is a world vision Church, but probably the best part of its ministry is the way its pastors, both male and female manage to bring the Holy Bible to life,and show its relevance to the day to day lives of its members.

Like all Churches it seeks support from ts congregation. The Difference between Hillsong and Anglican Church, is not in the storytelling, although Hillsong wins there, but in the thought and imagination that goes into fund raising. It is stressed all the time at Hillsong that no one is compelled to give what they cannot afford. However like the late Crazy John, who was a Muslim, testimonies are given about the blessings that come from a generous spirit. Hillsong prides itself on its generosity.

We had 4500 men at a conference about 18 months ago, who were told of a need in Lima Peru, for a Home for emotionally scarred girls, with bulimia and anorexia, and rape victims. The Church there had three counsellors, but no premises. The men collected $230,000 in cash on one day, and every cent went to Lima. In June the Pastor of that Church, an American, came to Hillsong Conference and said Thank you. There was not one dry eye in the auditorium, of 20,000 people.

With over thirty venues throughout the City of Sydney there are plenty of opportunities to be part of this Church, that never closes. It is the Body of Christ, and it attracts people from all walks of life. It has an army of volunteers. The old saying that what you get out of an organisation, relates to what you put in, applies. It is a seven day church, not just a Sunday wonder. And Yes, there are some lovely young women in it, and lots of talented singers and musicians. It has not shown me one boring service in over three years. The excitement and enthusiasm is contagious.

The opportunity to be part of this amazing church, is not something I would have liked to miss.

Tania Levin's story is disturbing. I was myself a member of Hillsong for 7 years; 5 of which I was on full-time paid staff.

For my own reflections, see my blog at:

http://www.thethinkingtheologian.blogspot.com

Theo

You raise some very valid points in your blog. Just be careful you don't pull up the wheat with the weeds. It is not your job.

Theo,
You think the main attraction of Hillsong Church lies in the hope of the good life?
Strange... I always thought a Christian believes Jesus is the truth. Whether a good life or bad has nothing to do with it.

I have never been to Hillsong church and for sure would be uncomfortable with 'charades' within a mega church or a pentecostal church. Though I am definite that I won't become so disillusioned as to turn to agnosticism (like Tanya Levin did). That would be missing the point.

Neither do I think good Christianity is about having good leadership in a church. A good leadership is a bonus, whether in a church, corporation or a government. Sure I hope there are plenty of wise leaders in a church. But the real church is your own body. So I really don't understand your fixation on leadership in Hillsong church as a 'thinking' christian.

Theo,
While I sense some pain or hurt coming from your thoughts, we need be judicious before sending alligators to those attempting to do good, those who are also made of flesh and blood. We’re all in this together. In all disputable matters we ought to refer to the dictum as set in the user’s manual, Romans 14:4.

Hi MGC Pal,

You make my point for me! The centre of Christianity IS Jesus - but Hillsong and churches like it have bastardised the gospel so as to be be more appealing to the masses.

My "fixation", as you put it, with leadership at Hillsong is for this very fact. My concern is that they are leading the Church (Christ's followers) astray.

Runner and Dan S de Merengue,

I do take your point: God will in time deal with the weeds amongst his crop. But isn't it only responsible to encourage others to think for themselves, and weigh everything up before buying in to something like the Hillsong phenomena?

Theo, how can you say that Hillsong has bastardised the Gospel of Jesus Christ unless you have attended for at least a year. I go to an Anglican Church on a Sunday and Hillsong on a Saturday, and having three years of a law degree I would be most upset if the stories told in one place were contradicting the other.

The stories and teaching are the same. The difference is that the Anglican teachings were originally put together for a captive audience because before the atheists got the Parliaments to pass the Australia Act 1986, God was Sovereign, and church was where you learned the Rules of Court. The Supreme Court was the Court of the Supreme Being,and if you went to church regularly you knew what to expect and what was expected of you.

Hillsong has grown up in the atheist, post Australia Act, era, and has had to attract its followers. It has had to make its services attractive and fun as some Anglican Churches have done, St Matthews Manly for example,and has attracted lots and lots of young people, who would otherwise be leaderless and lost to Christianity. It has its share of greybeards like me,and as one of them said, I would be out of here like a dog shot in the bum, if they bastardised the Gospels.

This comment has attracted quite a few comments, but the atricle by Peter Sellick, an Anglican, on Atheists has been a real hit. Hillsong has no issue with any Christian Church. In fact it attracts Anglicans, Presbyterians, Uniting Church Pastors, and the Salvo's, and has support and resources readily available to all comers. Yes they ask for money for God's house,and the Anglicans dont at some churches. There is no compulsion, and in fact the Widows mite story is told at times. She put in tuppence, and it was all she had. That brought her a blessing. they say , Go in peace to love and serve the Lord, at the Anglican Church, at Hillsong they say be blessed.

Christianity is all about love, not church politics.

Peter the Believer,

I was a member of Hillsong for 7 years, 5 of which I was on paid full-time staff there. I think I have a little authority to talk about its inner-workings.

I also have a bachelor degree in theology, so you might say I have a little authority in matters of Christian faith, too.

See my thougts at:

http://www.thethinkingtheologian.blogspot.com

Theo,
Is it inevitable that by their very nature, mega churches like Hillsong always 'bastardise' the gospel, as part of their appeal to the masses?

I hope not !

Even if that is so, I would still be glad Hillsong church is effective in attracting people.

Perhaps you should return to Hillsong to set up theology study groups to cater for those who feel the way you do, those who would otherwise leave the church. There would be a healthy balance then and Hillsong church will cater for a wider range of audience. You may even become one of the church leaders..., (of course not a 'superstar' type).

I guess I am more about putting one's gift to good use, rather than being too cynical.

This is a true story about an Irish Catholic friend I had in England.
Patrick (his real name) was a law-abiding hard working person who had one failing. Every now and then he went on a weekend 'bender'.
One Monday morning his wife woke and Pat was in bed after a weekend away, and the lounge room was full of tins of paint. Pat had no idea where the paint came from.
The local paper arrived with a story about the local paint shop being robbed, and being reasonably intelligent Pat and his wife were able to make a connection.
Pat decides the immediate course of action should be to see the local priest and make a confession. After his confession the priest said he would come to the house on Friday and bless the house. Pat and the priest were old friends.
Back home Pat and his wife decided that if they painted the house before Friday and the priest blessed the house everything would be OK. On Friday the priest ignored the smell of fresh paint and blessed the house.

Somehow remembering Pat always reminds me what it is about organised religion that I object to. I simply cannot accept that anyone can be God's lawyer (if God exists) and that the performance of magic rites changes anything. I am an agnostic whose leaning are towards God but away from religion. God and religion have nothing in common.

Theo

'Runner and Dan S de Merengue,

I do take your point: God will in time deal with the weeds amongst his crop. But isn't it only responsible to encourage others to think for themselves, and weigh everything up before buying in to something like the Hillsong phenomena?'

I totally agree. At the end of the day no one should violate their conscience on any issue. You must also be aware that any church with people in it will never be perfect. I think its important that you feel comfortable that the undefiled gospel is being preached before you can commit to something. Obviously your view is that Hillsong is not doing that. I can't comment on that side as I have not attended Hillsong church on any sort of regular basis. I have observed however that the bigger a church is the more they push their progams rather than just preaching from God's Holy Word.

One of Tanya Levin's friends on Facebook is Hillsong pastor Christine Caine. Seems Tanya still has at least one friend at Hillsong.

http://www.freeimagehosting.net/image.php?023d4dd59a.jpg