Category Archives: Ministry

Articles, Education, Prophecy, Teaching

Renee’s Lebanese Kitchen: Baked Kibbeh or Kibbeh in a Tray

Kibbeh is Lebanon’s national dish: a combination of lean mince meat, cracked wheat, and spices. Traditionally you could hear the sound of the the Lebanese village cook pulverising the meat in a mortar and pestle all day long. Today, the meat grinder or food processor does a pretty good job.

Served with a tossed salad or, better still, tabouli, kibbeh is a real treat – piping hot or cold out of the fridge. It can be served as a ‘football’ but this recipe is kibbeh baked in a tray.
Kibbeh Base
1 1/4 cup fine cracked wheat (also known as burghul – for the gluten intolerant, use corn couscous)
350 grams very lean lamb, finely ground
3 Tablespoons diced onions
2 Tablespoons chopped mint leaves
2 teaspoons salt
1/2 teaspoons pepper
1/2 teaspoons allspice
Wash cracked wheat and set aside for 45 minutes to drain thoroughly.
The lamb meat must be finely ground until its pulverised. Either do so in your own machine or obtain from a Middle East butcher (in a pinch, you can use extra lean lamb or beef from the supermarket). Add the mint and onions to the mince. Place in the mixing bowl.
In the sink, knead the kibbeh in the bowl. Add part of the softened, fully-drained cracked wheat and knead into the kibbeh. Keep your hands moist while you continue to add the wheat. Add the salt, pepper, and allspice. Knead the two ingredients until they are thoroughly mixed together.
Refrigerate if not using immediately.
Kibbeh Filling
350 grams minced lamb or beef.
1 large onion chopped finely
1 Tablespoon butter
1/3 cup pine nuts
1/2 teaspoon sumac (if available – a purple spice found in Middle Eastern stores and some supermarkets)
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon pepper
1/4 teaspoon allspice
(Renee likes to add a teaspoon of chilli powder for an extra kick but this is totally optional)
Brown the lamb in a frying pan without any oil. Break up clumps of meat with the wooden spoon. Add the onion, sumac, salt, pepper, and allspice to the browned mixture.
While the meat is cooking, melt the butter in a small saucepan. Add pine nuts and cook until lightly tanned. Be careful not to let this butter mixture or pine nuts burn. Add to the mince mixture.
Turn on low and cook for about 15 minutes. Stir occasionally and do not let it burn. Once cooked, place into a bowl to cool.
Preheat the oven to 200 C.
Your baked kibbeh will resemble a pie, with crust and filling, except it will be in a cake pan or tray, not a pie tin.
Divide the kibbeh base into two. Grease the baking tray (a round or square cake pan will do) with olive oil. Take half of the kibbeh base and spread on the bottom and sides of the tray (like a pie crust). Place kibbeh filling inside the tray. Use the other half of the kibbeh base to cover the filling. One suggestion is to turn the remaining kibbeh into patties, spread on the top of the filling, and use your moist fingers to smooth over the gaps until it is one solid crust.
Take a sharp knife and cut the kibbeh diagonally into diamond shapes as well as the sides of the pan. Pour about 4 tablespoons of olive oil or melted butter on top of the kibbeh. Cover with foil and bake for 40-45 minutes. In the last 10 minutes, remove the foil. Make sure the kibbeh does not dry out.
Serve with buttery rice, yogurt, salad (tabouli).
NOTE: If you don’t want to go through effort of baked kibbeh then take the kibbeh base, form into patties, and fry like a hamburger. However, the baked version is sensational and worth the effort.

Articles, Education, Prophecy, Teaching

On the Edge Part 03: How Democracy Is Undermined in the West

We live in a time of populist revolts which, among other things, are the result (or cause) of political instability. There have been ‘shock election results’ in 2015, the unexpected vote for BREXIT in Britain, the rise of Donald Trump in the US and of right-wing parties in Europe.
It is our conviction that the erosion of democracy in the western world is part of the reason for these political shakings. In the previous article, we look at the ingredients of a truly democratic society (which includes but goes much further than elections). Again, they are
1.      Regular elections, free and fair;
2.      Rule of Law;
3.      Universally recognised human rights;
4.      Independent, constitutionally-based judiciary;
5.      Free and responsible press;
6.      Separation of powers;
7.      Balance of power;
8.      Separation yet equal respect of church and state;
9.      Basic moral foundations.
Yet, these important pillars are being attacked across the world. This is especially true of ‘free speech,’ which is being assaulted by political correctness and hate-speech laws. When free speech goes, democracy goes with it.
Here are some examples of the erosion of democracy:
Remember the Russian Revolution of February 1917? It was a genuine revolution with democratic aspirations. However, the revolution was hijacked in October 1917 by the Bolsheviks, led by Vladimir Lenin. He allowed a planned referendum to go ahead a few days later. To his shock horror, the referendum result was exactly the opposite of what he wanted. Lenin was not about to allow the Russian electorate to subvert his plans for a communist paradise. So he cancelled the results and thus began the Marxist totalitarian regime we came to know as the Soviet Union.
Though the European Union (EU) espouses democracy and makes it a requirement for membership, remember that EU laws – which are binding on all member nations – are not made by an elected parliament. They are crafted by the 28 member unelected European Commission. The EU Parliament either amends, edits, or rejects the laws. When EU member states have EU-related referendums which fail – no worries – they get them to vote again or repackage the legislation to help it pass. Combine this with heavy EU regulations and a vast bureaucracy, you have the choking, not flourishing, of democracy.
Even the birthplace of modern democracy, the United States, has been witnessing the deterioration of democracy right under its nose. Modern presidents, probably since the 1930s, have been using a procedure called ‘Executive Order,’ where they ‘order’ a course of action without the approval of Congress. These orders are not mandated or allowed in the US Constitution.
The modern US Supreme Court has been notorious for going beyond its mandate to interpret law in light of the American Constitution. Instead, progressivist judges have become de facto legislators. They did it in 1973 with the Roe versus Wade ruling, which made abortion legal in all 50 US states. While pro-abortion (euphemistically called ‘pro-choice’) advocates say Roe versus Wade gave women a ‘constitutional right’ to an abortion, how can this be when nothing – absolutely nothing – in the US Constitution even hints at abortion rights? America was trying to resolve the abortion issue, democratically, state-by-state. Yet, the Supreme Court came and short-circuited the whole process. Thirty-one states were immediately left without abortion laws. Far from resolving the issue, Roe v. Wade became one of the great battle cries of the continuing ‘cultural civil war’ and the most contentious social issue since the abolition of slavery.
Again in 2015, with Obergefell vs. Hodges, the US Supreme Court ruled that all 50 states must allow same-sex marriage. The American states were trying to work out the issue democratically, and the court came in and overruled them. As US Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts said of this court decision, ‘The Constitution had nothing to do with it.’ Democracy was overruled yet again.
Whenever an issue is fundamental to society, the most democratic thing to do is have a civil, informed debate and then let the electorate decide. That especially true with the definition of marriage, a bedrock of society. In September 2016, the Australian federal government proposed a marriage plebiscite for 2017 to let the people decide on whether to marriage should be defined as an exclusive union between a ‘man and woman,’ or between ‘two persons.’ The leftist political parties are against it! To say that the Australian electorate is incapable of making an intelligent and fair-minded decision on this vital is an anti-democratic attitude. You may want to read Dennis Prager’s article Why the Left Hates Referendums (http://townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/2016/06/28/why-the-left-hates-referendums-n2184036?newsletterad=0
When the press or courts or parliament or executive branch or the military or some or all of the above go beyond their constitutional mandate, then democracy is undermined. When that happens, political stability begins to suffer, too.

If we can return to true democracy, Biblical morality, a commitment to absolute truth, and a spiritual revival, stability is assured. After all, we will learn what Jesus means when He says those who obey His word are wise people who build their lives on the rock, not the sinking sand (Matthew 7:24-27). 
Apologetics, Articles, Bible, Education, Prophecy, Teaching

There Was No King in Israel: Why Study the Book of Judges?

It was the best of times and the worst of times. The children of Israel, liberated from Egyptian bondage and dwelling in the land of promise, should have been enjoying the blessings of God, living under their own vines and fig trees. Instead, they faced cycles of backsliding, carnality, followed by repressive foreign occupation.
When they woke up to their sin, Israel called out to God, who sent them a human deliverer called a ‘judge.’ Once the judge delivered the nation from their oppressors, Israel remained faithful to the LORD as long as the judge lived. Once he or she passed away, then they returned to their old worldly ways.
This pattern, which occurred with nauseating regularity, is the story of the Book of Judges. This book covers a period of over 350 years from the time of Joshua the conqueror until the coming of Samuel, the final judge (who is first mentioned in I Samuel, not Judges).
There are some great stories of deliverance in it, like that of Deborah and Barak, Gideon, Samson, and Jephthah. Some of these judges are so noteworthy that they merit a mention in the ‘hall of faith’ in Hebrews Chapter 11. Yet there are some real scandals, like the Danites stealing Micah’s idols and priest and setting up the northern city of Dan on a foundation of idolatry. Years later, Jeroboam’s golden calf was installed here, the altar platform is still present until today. Even worse was the brutal rape and murder of the Levite’s concubine which led to civil war and the near annihilation of the tribe of Benjamin.
Great insights and lessons await you as you study the Book of Judges.
Hebrew Name
It is easy to confuse the heroes of this book with men and women, wearing long black robes and white whigs while pounding a gavel in a courtroom. The Hebrew name for judges is shophetim which translated means rulers, saviours, and deliverers. The judge can settle disputes, win battles, liberate and deliver people. After their military victory, they settle down to to civilian leadership, where they rule and judge.
Author
Anonymous, though tradition nominates Samuel as the author.
Date
Probably after Saul became king. The reason is that the Book of Judges uses the phrase ‘There was no king in Israel,’ implying that Israel had a king at the time of writing.
Theme
Cycles of reprobation and revival. The pattern was one of:
The Descent
Service (of God),
Seduction,
Sin,
Scandal,
Servitude (to foreign occupiers) – this is where they hit rock bottom
The Ascent
Seeking God,
Sanctification, and
Salvation.
This pattern is what happened again and again and again.
Portrait of Christ in Judges
In Judges we learn about Christ as Saviour-Ruler. As long as the judge lived, Israel served the LORD. Since Christ rose from the dead and lives forevermore, His people will remain eternally faithful to God.
Like the rest of the Bible, Judges does not do a whitewash of the main characters. It tells their story just as it was, warts and all: Gideon made an ephod in Oprah, Samson had ‘women problems,’ and Jephthah uttered a rash vow. Yet all of this helps to highlight to glory of Christ, who never sinned and is able to save us to the uttermost (Hebrews 7:25).
Judges serves as a reminder, if one was needed, how humanity stands in desperate need for a Saviour.
Key Verses in Judges
Judges 2:20-21:And the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel; and he said, Because that this people hath transgressed my covenant which I commanded their fathers, and have not hearkened unto my voice; 21 I also will not henceforth drive out any from before them of the nations which Joshua left when he died:
Judges 21:25:In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes.
Distinctives
Judges is a real object lesson of ‘comparison and contrast.’ We see good and evil, light and darkness, faithfulness and debauchery, living side-by-side. While this may seem like deep dark ancient history, it helps illustrate the ‘last days,’ which Scripture teaches is a time of ‘contrasts,’ just like Judges.
•   Contrast: God’s faithfulness to Israel’s backsliding.
•   Contrast: A penitent Israel to a hedonistic Israel.
•   Contrast: The faith of the judges to the faithlessness of the people.
•   Contrast: The perfection of Christ to the flaws of the judges.
Outline of Judges
1.       Failure of Israel to Conquer all the Land (1:1-3:34): Failure of Judah, Benjamin, Joseph, Zebulon, Asher, Naphtali, Dan. Angel makes announcement.
2.       Southern Campaign: Othniel, Ehud, Shamgar (3:5-31)
3.       Northern Campaign: Deborah/Barak (4:1-5:31)
4.       Central Campaign: Gideon, Abimelech, Tola, Jair (6:1-10:5)
5.       Eastern Campaign: Jephthah (10:6-12:7)
6.       Second Northern Campaign: (12:8-15)
7.       Western Campaign: Samson (13-16)
8.       Israel’s Idolatry (17:1-18:31)
9.       Israel’s Immorality (19:1-30)
10.   Israel’s Civil War (20:1-21:25)

Articles, Bible, Education, Prophecy, Teaching

FROM ‘DE FACTO’ TO ‘DE JURE:’ Part 02

Finding Legitimacy in an Immoral World
‘Marriage should be honoured by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.’ –Hebrews 13:4
DE FACTO: Existence without legal or ecclesiastical recognition or sanction.
DE JURE: Existence by right according to law.
Last month we looked at the ever-rising phenomena of de facto relationships, also known as cohabitation. We will explore this topic some more.
Are There Any Benefits to Cohabitation?[i]
Just because something is commonplace and permitted by society does not make it healthy and right. After all, cigarette smoking is legal but it can cost your thousands of dollars a year and have a detrimental effect on your health. Gambling also is legal and look at the trail of trouble and sorrow it leaves.
           
Some claim that a de facto relationship helps prepare a couple for marriage and prevents divorce. Does it? Research suggests otherwise: couples that live in a de facto relationship before marriage are more likely to divorce than couples that wait until marriage. One statistic said that of couples who were married twenty years or more, 56% of those who lived as a de facto couple before marriage ended up in divorce, while 29% of those who never cohabited before marriage ended up in divorce. According to the Jubilee Report on cohabitation: ‘The idea that first cohabitations that lead to marriage do not result in an increased rate of divorce is not reflected by this data set: prior cohabitation with a spouse is associated with 60 per cent higher risk of divorce (emphasis mine).
Another study concluded that 75% of married couples were still together when their child turned 16; only 7% of de facto couples can make the same claim. That’s a ten-fold increased for the married couples. In Britain, the direct annual cost of family breakdown is GBP 41.7 billion. The Daily Mail Online, ‘Married Parents Ten Times More Likely to Stay Together,’ Sarah Harris (February 2010).[ii]
Why Are Those Who Live Together
Before Marriage More Likely to Divorce?
Why is this the case? Why do couples who live in a de facto relationship have a greater chance of divorce? It is like the analogy of a building during an earthquake. If the building has deep, strong foundations, then it will withstand the tremors. However, if the building has weak foundations, the first shake will bring it down. Life-long relationships have good foundations: Godly commitment, mutual love and respect, morality and strength. These things will help the relationship weather any storm. Unfortunately, the de facto relationship does not have these things and so even when one eventually marries, due to the poor moral and commitment foundations, it will be vulnerable to collapse, even with the slightest of shaking.
Others say that single parents enter into a de facto partnership so that the children can have a father figure in the home. While it is indeed possible for non-biological fathers to show love and kindness to (step) children, there is an alarming trend of the adverse effects de facto relationships have on youngsters.
In his article, “De Facto Danger” (Melbourne Herald Sun, April 6, 1998, page 19), Paul Gray says “Our ongoing willingness to pretend that de facto fathering is just as good as traditional fathering (the biological father living in a stable relationship with the mother) is having horrific consequences.”  Gray quotes former human rights commissioner Brian Burdekin as saying de facto living arrangements have increased the child sex abuse rate by 600 per cent. A NSW Child Protection Council reports says suspected killers in de facto relationships was 6 1/2 times higher than in the population at large. The sad and sensational cases of Jesse Winning (14 months) and Daniel Valerio (age 2), who were murdered by their mother’s de facto partners, only highlights this alarming trend. ‘Traditional fathering, within the stable, two-parent family, is clearly the best way to protect and raise children. For that, the evidence is overwhelming,’ remarks Gray.
If the person is uncommitted to their de facto partner, why would they be caring and committed to the children of that partner?
           
Above all, there is a far more serious implication about de facto relationships that have a long-term effect. Any sexual activity within these relationships clearly falls into the category of fornication and/or adultery. Apart from the temporal disadvantages of these acts, like venereal disease and unwanted pregnancies, are the eternal consequences. On this matter, God’s Word is very clear. Hebrews 13:4 affirms this. Read also Ephesians 5:3-5; I Timothy 1:9-10; Revelation 21:8; 22:15. The implications couldn’t be plainer
Study after study confirms the following conclusions:
1.   De facto or cohabitation relations lead to a markedly increased risk of divorce compared to those who have never married.
2.   De facto increases the risk of domestic violence against women and men, and also violence against children;
3.   Lower levels of happiness and satisfaction;
4.   De facto relations have serious spiritual consequences.
Having observed the world for all these years, it is impossible to ascribe any benefits whatsoever to cohabitation. Consider the bedrock motivation behind many de facto relationships: a lack of making a genuine, long-term commitment; fear of failure; wanting to reap the benefits and pleasures without taking the responsibilities and commitment those benefits require; exhibiting and enhancing weak character. Of course, these attitudes of de facto-ism are not just in relationships; they can also occur in business, politics, the church, and more.
To be continued


 FACTS ABOUT COHABITATION[i]

•       Over half of all first marriages are proceeded by cohabitation (University of Wisconsin document)
•       Cohabitation doesn’t reduce the likelihood of divorce–in fact it leads to a higher divorce risk. One study showed 46% higher risk (1992 Journal of Marriage and Family).
•       No positive contribution of cohabitation to marriage has ever been found, not even sexual compatibility, as usually suggest (1993 Journal of Marriage and Family)
•       Cohabitants tend not be as committed as married couples, or prepared to work on their differences (1995 Journal of Family issues)
•       Particularly problematic is the area of serial cohabitation. It generates a greater willingness to dissolve later relationships. (1993 Journal of Family Issues)
•       About 60% of cohabitation ends in marriage (1989 National Study of Cohabitation
•       In general, cohabiting relationships tend to be less satisfactory than marriage relationship-s, with cohabiting couples reporting lower levels of happiness, sexual exclusivity and sexual satisfaction, as well as poorer relationships with parents (Bumpass, Sweet & Cherlin’s 1991 study)
•       After five years, only 10% of cohabiting couples are together. They do not tend to permanency (Bumpass & Sweet’s 1989 study)
•       Married couples have substantial benefits over the unmarried in terms of labour force productivity, physical and mental health, general happiness and longevity (1994 American Journal of Sociology)
•       Annual rates of depression among cohabiting couples is more than three times the married rate. (1990 Psychiatric Disorders in America)
•       Physical and sexual abuse of a spouse is much higher. One study showed evidence of being twice as high (1991 Journal of marriage and family)
•       Abuse is 20 times higher for children with cohabiting, but biological parents, but 33 times greater if the parent was cohabiting with a non-parenting male partner (1993 Family Education trust: London).
•       The 1996 poverty rate was 6% with married parents, but 31 % with cohabiting parents (1996 Journal of Marriage and the Family).
–taken from Leadership NOW! January 2000, page 12.
Apologetics, Articles, Education, Prophecy, Teaching

FROM DEFEAT TO VICTORY: A Lesson from Joshua Part 01

Life has a nasty habit of not going according to the script. The journey is often longer, harder, and more unpredictable than expected. Victory and defeat, success and failure, joy and tears, are often next door neighbours, happening in quick succession. However, when you follow Biblical principles, ultimate blessing, success, and victory will be yours.
Let’s take the example from the life of Joshua. As appointed, anointed and directed by God, he led the children of Israel into the promised land – the inheritance promised to their forefathers Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. However, the journey from promise to fulfilment went in directions hard to imagine.
1.     Left turn: Jacob/Israel, due to the famine in Joseph’s day, ended up leaving the promised land altogether;
2.     Sojourn: Israel ends up living in Egypt.
3.     Length: The Egyptian sojourn lasted 400 years.
4.     Return: The journey back to the promised land was long and indirect, with twists and turns throughout the wilderness. Due to five sins, the journey took Israel 40 years (I Corinthians 10:5-13).
5.     Fulfilment: Now that Israel left Egypt, made it through the wilderness, and stood at the gate of the promised land, their inheritance would not be handed on a silver platter. They would have to fight for it. There are numerous promises in Scripture and all of them are ‘Yes’ and ‘Amen’ in Christ (II Corinthians 1:20). Yet, we too, will have to ‘fight the good fight of faith’ in order to lay hold of them (I Timothy 6:12).
Victory and Defeat
The first fight was the conquest of Jericho (Joshua 6). Though an impregnable fortress, Jericho’s wall crumbled with ease before the victorious Israelites. Flush with victory, Joshua found out that their next destination, Ai, would be a ‘cake walk.’ No need to send the entire army – just 3,000 men.
This ‘piece of cake’ turned out to be a death trap. The people of Ai came out of their town as tigers and 36 Israelites were smitten.
What went wrong? Why was there this ‘speed bump’ that knocked the entire enterprise off-track? After rising up early in the morning and seeking God, Joshua got a very direct answer from God to explain their defeat. It was not because of the strength of their enemies. The cause came from within: Israel sinned.
The sin was the in several parts (Joshua 7:11):
1.     They transgressed God’s covenant – the binding agreement that attracts great blessing when obeyed and terrible curses when broken;
2.     They took the accursed thing;
3.     They stole it;
4.     Dissembled it;
5.     They put it among their own stuff.
This was no misdemeanour. Failure to obey meant that Israel was rendered powerless before a minor enemy. Furthermore, God said He would no longer be with them until they rooted out the accursed thing.
As is often the case, our greatest challenges come from the enemy within, including our own evil hearts, more than from external foes. One’s ability to be cleansed from the evil attracts God’s presence, which virtually assures victory.
In short, defeat came to Israel because it touched the accursed thing. Only by remedying the situation could victory come.
Next month, we will learn the nature of the accursed thing and have to pass from curse to blessing.

TO BE CONTINUED: