Jesus is among the beasts and the Ancient Serpent himself. But the wilderness will not dominate the Son of David. Jesus is the Last Adam, and he enters the wilderness with the power to subdue and renew. In Isaiah 43, the Lord says, “Behold, I am doing a new thing; now it springs forth, do you not perceive it? I will make a way in the wilderness and rivers in the desert. The wild beasts will honor me” (Isa. 43:19–20).

When Mark’s Gospel opens, Mark highlights the ministry of John the Baptist (1:2–8). But then Mark zeros in on the baptism (1:9–11) and temptation of Jesus (1:12–13), since those things preceded Jesus’s public ministry (1:14–15).
The language of Jesus’s temptations fascinates me because Mark mentions the presence of wild animals, and Mark is the only Gospel writer who does this.
12The Spirit immediately drove him out into the wilderness. 13And he was in the wilderness forty days, being tempted by Satan. And he was with the wild animals, and the angels were ministering to him.
Why would the presence of “wild animals” be worth mentioning? First of all, the location of the wilderness explains the presence of wild animals. The wilderness was understood as a place for wild animals, and the opening verses of Mark’s Gospel introduced the “wilderness” idea (1:3, quoting from Isa. 40). John the Baptist was baptizing “in the wilderness” (1:4), and now in 1:12 we read that the Spirit drove Jesus out into “the wilderness.”
Second, the Old Testament prophets sometimes spoke of wild animals when their oracles portrayed a desolate or cursed setting. In Isaiah 13, the warning for Babylon’s headquarters was that “Wild animals will lie down there, and their houses will be full of howling creatures” (Isa. 13:21).
Third, these Old Testament prophets anticipated a day when the wilderness setting—marked by wild animals—would be transformed by blessing and flourishing.
Read More
Related Posts:

I remember when John Chalmers, clerk of the General Assembly stated: “We had a debate which made very clear that we were not interfering with our theological definition of marriage and were not going to the place where ministers or deacons could themselves conducting same sex marriages.”. He lied.  Plain and simple.  He knew that this was a step on the road to conducting same sex marriages, and that the theological definition of marriage was being changed. And no one called him out on it.  Although yours truly tried – and was roundly castigated for being ‘unChristian.’

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
It’s a joy to be back in my native land – the most beautiful country in the world!  But there is also a sadness and sorrow.  Not just because I tested positive for Covid on landing – and now have the most miserable man flu!  The main sorrow I had was reading the following in The Courier on arrival – as the Church of Scotland prepares to hammer the final nail into its own coffin.
“Just this week, the Church of Scotland announced that 29 of its presbyteries were in favour of ministers and deacons conducting the ceremonies of same sex couples should they so wish. The Church is a democratic institution so the final word will go the General Assembly next month. But assuming it’s a Yes, the words “I do” could be said by same sex couples in churches by the summer….” These were part of an article written by Kezia Dugdale, former Labour leader in Scotland.  She went on to exult “That is absolutely phenomenal social progress by any measure.” 
That’s an interesting but not unsurprising perspective from an atheist, who has no love for the Gospel.  However, the truth is precisely the opposite.  This is not progress.  This is the Church of Scotland aiding and abetting Scottish society as it reverts, not just to pre-Reformation days, but to pre-Christian days.  My beloved nation is regressing back into the pagan world.  What used to be the National Church is meekly following whatever path the Regressives lead us – it would be inaccurate to say that they are leading – they have neither the initiative nor courage to lead.
I am not surprised at the Church of Scotland going this route – despite all the lies from leading clergy about how this would not be the case.  I remember when John Chalmers, clerk of the General Assembly stated: “We had a debate which made very clear that we were not interfering with our theological definition of marriage and were not going to the place where ministers or deacons could themselves conducting same sex marriages.”. He lied.  Plain and simple.  He knew that this was a step on the road to conducting same sex marriages, and that the theological definition of marriage was being changed. And no one called him out on it.  Although yours truly tried – and was roundly castigated for being ‘unChristian’ – https://theweeflea.com/2016/05/23/a-rubicon-has-been-crossed-the-church-of-scotland-assembly-decision-on-saturday/
I always thought that it was the deceit and misleading the Lord’s people that was unchristian – not pointing out that deceit.  Indeed, Christ himself was not averse to pointing out to some religious leaders that they belonged to their father the devil, when he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John 8:44)
Kezia’s Perspective
Kezia Dugdale also confirmed what we all, (except some gullible evangelicals), knew – that the purpose of the C of S leadership all along was to recognise same sex marriage – but to fool as many evangelicals as possible into thinking that we were being listened to, so that they could keep us on board. (I use ‘us’ because I identify with evangelicals as my brothers and sisters – whatever the denomination).   Dugdale speaks about how she had conversations with Rev. Lorna Hood moderator of the General Assembly in 2013, who promised her that SSM would come.
 “I just couldn’t understand it, especially as all the Christians I knew supported it. They believed in marriage as a union of two people rooted in love, respect and commitment and wanted it for everyone.”  This shows both the limited understanding of Christianity and of marriage.    If marriage is for everyone why limit it to two people?  And does that include incestuous marriage – if for example two sisters love, respect and commit to one another, why shouldn’t they get married?  It is telling that Lorna Hood was unable to help Kezia with her understanding – except to point out that some people were more ‘traditional’.  No, Lorna – it has nothing to do with tradition – and everything to do with Scripture.   But therein lies the problem for the Church of Scotland – it has rejected the Bible as its authoritative standard.  I recall sitting in the Assembly as the Bible was openly and publicly mocked – to laughter from the commissioners and not a word of rebuke from the leadership.
A Lost Battle
I have been involved with this issue for many years.  And I have to say that I now feel completely vindicated. But it is a battle that has left many wounds.  I think of Dominic Smart – a Church of Scotland minister who paid a massive price for his faithfulness.  He was truly a prophet without honour in his own land.  I miss him. I recall an amazing anonymous letter from 15 Glasgow presbytery ‘evangelicals’, who attacked me – and Willie Phillip – another faithful minister who paid the price. I think of Jeremy Middleton who gave the best speech I have ever heard at any Assembly and gave me a faint hope that things might be turned around – only to have that hope dashed by a couple of evangelicals running round, persuading others to play the political game and go along with the establishment. I think of Albert Bogle’s ‘compromise’ motion, which was not a compromise at all – and which gave the progressives everything they wanted. I think of John McPake promising me that the evangelicals had a plan – and that if I just kept quiet, I would see them work it out.  Part of that plan was for Angus Morrison to become an evangelical moderator.  That worked – in that he became moderator. But he ended up being honoured by the University of Glasgow for ‘changing attitudes to same sex relationships in the Church of Scotland”.
Read More
Related Posts:

Even though church is a place where the God of consuming holiness comes to meet and speak to his people, believers stand before holy God every week with confidence and joy, being clothed with the righteousness of Jesus Christ (Hebrews 4:16). In the same way, even though church is a place where disciples fostered a countercultural relationship, believers can nurture a deep and authentic relationship of love for one another as they imitate Christ who had loved them to the point of laying down His life for them (John 13:34). Most importantly, while Satan continuously seeks to destroy a church and her saints, the Scripture testifies that Jesus will continue to protect and empower the Church so her enemy will never triumph over it (Matthew 16:17-19).

Church – a Safe, Welcoming, and Casual Place?
A big stage with smoke machines and flashing spotlights, emotional music and songs, a man wearing jeans and a shirt with tattoos standing on a podium, a sign that reads “Welcome! You are loved here!” These are the pictures that come into our minds when we think about typical broad evangelical churches in the United States of America.
In recent centuries, many modern American churches have gone through a significant shift in their cultures. For example, in the 20th century, American evangelicalism was impacted by the “Seeker-Sensitive movement,” where churches actively contextualized their cultures, practices, worship, and message to attract irreligious people.[1] In the 21st century then, American evangelicalism is impacted by various social and political movements such as “Black Lives Matter” or “Sexual Revolution”, causing many churches to embrace and promote such cultural agendas to embrace socially marginalized people.
And while these cultural and social movements, such as the seeker-sensitive, social-justice, and sexual-revolution cultures, have influenced many evangelical churches in various ways, one undeniable influence they have played is convincing churches to reshape their identity – an identity that communicates they are safe, friendly, and casual places to the world and to people.        
But this raises an important question. Is church really a safe, friendly, and casual place as many modern churches try to communicate to the people? Is church really a place where worshippers and visitors can casually and comfortably enter and enjoy their time? My answer is no. Contrary to many churches that try to communicate to its worshippers and visitors, I would argue that a church is first and foremost a dangerous place to be for anyone.
 1. A Place with A Dangerous God
The church is a dangerous place because it is, first and foremost, a place where a dangerous God comes to meet His people. Contrary to the widely spread view about God in modern American Christianity as loving, accepting, and affirming, the Bible often depicts God as an unapproachable being. For example, there are many accounts in the Bible where saints encountered God in their lives and were utterly swallowed up by fear and dread.
To mention a few incidents from the Old Testament, when Gideon encountered God at Ophrah, he cried out, “Alas, O Lord GOD! For now I have seen the angel of the LORD face to face (Judges. 6:22).” When Isaiah encountered God and saw Him with his own eyes in his vision, he also cried out, “Woe is me! For I am lost… For my eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts! (Isaiah. 6:5)” When Elijah encountered God at the Mount Horeb, he quickly covered his face with a cloak (1 King 19:13) because he understood the danger of being in God’s presence as God had once spoken to Moses, “You cannot see my face, for man shall not see me and live (Exodus. 33:20).”
To be more precise, it is God’s holy attribute that renders Him to be a dangerous being because His holiness cannot tolerate any hint of unholiness or sin in His presence (Habakkuk 1:13a). In fact, the New Testament also recognizes the danger of God’s holy presence as it commands Christians to stand in awe and reverence when they come into the presence of God as it declares, “Our God is a consuming fire (Hebrews 12:29).”
It is this Holy God who comes to meet and speak to His people every Sunday when worshippers gather together in His sanctuary. The God who does not, “Leave the guilty unpunished, visiting the iniquity of fathers on the children and on the grandchildren to the third and fourth generations (Exodus 34:7)”; the God who does not tolerate man’s clever inventions or ways of strange fire (Leviticus 10:1), every man and woman who comes to church every Sunday and stands before the audience of this dangerous God.
Read More
Related Posts: