Anti-Saccharine Jesus

Here is my first portrait of Jesus. I wanted to work against the common saccharine, blue eyed blond image that is the traditional portrayal.

This painting is 60cm x 60cm (24″ x 24″) and mostly painted with a pallette knife, except for the background where I used a brush.


He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.

Gospel in Symbols

I think this painting has a hint of art-deco in its appearance.
I’ve included text and a few symbols relating to the gospel. These feature regularly in my paintings.


ישוע : Jesus’ name in Hebrew
I AM : God’s name revealed to Moses.
Clock : 3 o’clock, time of Jesus’ death
cup : Last supper and Gethsemane
Y : my stylised representation of the crucifixion

Some of these symbols also have local significance in my home town, being fashioned after local land marks.

What a UFO taught me about faith.

ufoA personal UFO experience helped to convince me of the unreliability of UFO witnesses.

One morning many years ago, while driving to work, I looked up and saw an extremely strange but clearly mechanical “craft” flying above my car. I felt a mix of shock and elation at finally seeing an undeniably real UFO. I looked back to the road and then back up to the “craft”, but by this time it was turning and could now be clearly seen to be a light plane.

What if that first glance had been the only view I’d been able to get?

b4305Years later I compared that experience with an encounter recorded in a book by Arthur Shuttlewood, one of the 1960s-1970s most well-known UFO writers. He was a journalist in the town of Warminster, next to Salisbury Plain in England. In the 60s that town became the centre of one of Britain’s most significant UFO “flaps” and thousands of people flocked there over the years for a guaranteed UFO sighting.

Shuttlewood wrote about seeing an approaching UFO that disguised itself a plane as it flew overhead, and then resumed its UFO form as it moved away. Very similar to my own experience, but I was willing to accept the more mundane reality of my experience. Shuttlewood chose to adopt a more fantastic explanation.

round-in-circlesAn additional piece of my personal UFO puzzle came through reading Jim Schnabel’s book Round in Circles, in which the author investigated the crop circle phenomenon by investigating the crop circle investigators. That book has to be the best I’ve ever read on any topic related to “the unknown”. It blew the credibility of the investigators’ “evidence” right out of the paddock. Prior to that I had been far too gullible, assuming that those people were reporting facts – that they actually WANTED to know and share the truth about the matter they were investigating.

It showed how people will believe what they want to believe, they will see evidence to support what they what to believe and they will refuse to accept any contrary evidence no matter how definitive that contrary evidence may be.

Not only did all of this change my perspective of UFOs and other “paranormal phenomena”, it helped me to re-address my Christian faith. It encouraged me not to take things at “face value” just because it was allegedly “Christian”. [ I’ve addressed some of this in part of this previously with articles like this one: ]

I realised that even the label “Christian” doesn’t necessarily make something trustworthy – that the label has been abused and the definition of what “Christian” means doesn’t necessarily fit in with a biblical portrayal of what it means to be Christ-like.

For too long I trusted the testimonies of Christians without question. I wanted some kind of verification of the reality of God and that the miraculous events recorded in the bible were true. I therefore lapped up any stories, any personal accounts that I could see as proof of the things I wanted confirmed. My need was so pressing that I didn’t give those accounts adequate scrutiny. After all the experiences were reported by Christians, and Christians do not lie, exaggerate or misrepresent. (Do they?)

And it is so easy to point the finger now, to look back and see the dishonesty – but was I any less guilty? While I don’t recall any outright fabrications, I know there were occasions when I “stretched” the truth just a little, or maybe withheld a pertinent fact to give the impression of something more “exciting” and “miraculous” than the strict truth would have conveyed.

Ironically, that willingness to settle for something that fell short of expectations combined with the willingness to hide the short fall through embellishment of facts was perhaps a reason why there was a short fall in the first place. How can anyone expect to benefit from God’s blessings without genuine honesty and humility?

These things played a part in helping me push through the “spiritual crisis” I experienced from the late 1980s through to the early 2000s. I wrestled with the inconsistences of the “Christian” existence I’d previously experienced. What was genuine, what was wishful thinking, what was outright fantasy/fabrication? To what extent had I fooled myself into suppressing genuine doubts and concerns because I WANTED to believe certain things? What did I believe, what should I believe, and why?

14836My condition at that time was very accurately described in a statement from Salman Rushdie’s book Midnight’s Children, something I recognised in myself as soon as I read it. One of the book’s characters was described as being “unable to worship a God in whose existence he could not wholly disbelieve”.  Likewise, while I was struggling to worship God, I was equally unable to deny His existence. I was caught between two very uncomfortable extremes.

A little over 10 years ago the wrestling came to an end. After a brief period of vulnerability during which I faced the risk of turning back to the old ways and picking up the same bad habits and beliefs, I recognised the need to restart with a sound foundation and to be much more discerning about what was added to that foundation. Essential to this new beginning was honesty. To be honest to myself – not to push aside concerns when something didn’t seem quite right, and to take an honest approach to God and His word: not trying to change them to make them more “user-friendly”: not changing God to make Him and His ways more like I’d want them to be.

That approach hasn’t made the journey easy. Often it has meant going against the flow and disagreeing with established practices and doctrines. It annoys people. It makes them angry. And I understand that. I remember how strongly I’d try to defend the doctrines I’d learned from favoured teachers. I could duel with proof texts as well as anyone and had a strong arsenal of memorised texts to draw upon. But behind the certainty there were questions and doubts that I’d chosen to push aside. Questions and doubts that, if properly addressed, could have saved me a lot of trouble later: fifteen years of trouble.

I have been learning the importance of checking things thoroughly. The obvious reference to give would be the example of the Bereans who searched the scriptures daily to check what Paul had been telling them. Too few today emulate their practice. Too few scrutinise what they are taught but prefer to judge a teaching according to its ability to please the ear. Too many hand over responsibility for their own spiritual welfare, choosing to accept, unchallenged, the word of others who have been recognised as “church authorities”.

But the person with the potential to do most damage to our faith is our selves. WE are the ones who choose the teachers we favour. We are the ones who choose to be swayed by the words of friends and relatives. We are the ones who close our eyes to the parts of scripture that challenge favoured beliefs. We are the only ones who can make the decision for ourselves (and the only ones who determine whether we act on the decision) to seek God honestly for the truth. We are the only ones who can decide for ourselves that we won’t be satisfied with anything less than the truth.

But all of that depends on whether we DO want truth or whether we are content to believe something else, even when evidence (such as scripture) definitively contradicts it. Do we want a faith with genuine legitimacy, based on truth, or are we satisfied to believe in something just  because it seems appealing ?

Abbott’s New mantra

In yesterday’s post I mentioned the 180 degree turn in Liberal/National party rhetoric regarding Interest rates. (“Interest rates will always be lower under a coalition government “).

This morning I heard Tony Abbot’s “new” claim replacing that now discredited mantra. He’s now saying that the economy will always be stronger under a coalition government.

Almost Deja vu all over again with another unprovable, undeliverable promise?

And when can any “promise” made by Tony Abbot be trusted? [see here ].

It is clearly too late now, but if the coalition wanted to win the coming election on legitimate grounds rather than by default, that is by people voting FOR them instead of AGAINST Labor, they should have appointed (and kept) a more qualified leader. 

The Election Silly Season: Thoughts of Interest.

Australians are heading for a Federal election early next month and the silliness has started.

I clearly remember the rhetoric from previous elections regarding official interest rates. The standard Liberal party line insisted that there would always be lower interest rates under a Liberal government (presenting this as a good thing). Reference was always made to the 1980s when under the previous Labor government interest rates had skyrocketed during a period of recession.

Today the reserve bank are predicted to lower interest rates and I’ve seen that the Liberal shadow treasurer has said that lowering interest rates would be a bad thing.

Now personally I’m relatively uneducated when it comes to the economy – but I’m very familiar with political spin. Can I assume that politicians are confident that the average person has such a short memory that they won’t notice a 180 degree turn around in attitude?

In the last days of the former Liberal government lower interest rates were GOOD:  “vote for us and be guaranteed lower rates than Labor can deliver”. Clearly, when interest rates are at an all time low such a message can’t be used anymore .

Now my views on interest rates:

1) High interest rates are bad for those struggling with mortgages.

2) Low interest rates are bad for those relying on investments during their retirement.

3) Low interest rates may SEEM to make home ownership more accessible to those trying to buy their first home, but in reality low rates helps to push up property prices – thereby increasing the mortgage burden when rates inevitably increase again.

4) Even small interest rate increases can be crippling when larger amounts of money have been borrowed.

Am I writing this from an anti-Liberal, pro-Labor bias?

No. It is most likely I will vote for the Liberal candidate in my local area – Labor have yet to field a viable candidate who they are willing to invest time and money to promote. However given the choice between current Prime minister Kevin Rudd (Labor) and leader of the opposition Tony Abbott (Liberal),  I’d lean towards neither.

If given my choice I’d like to give Malcolm Turnbull a go – I don’t see a worthy candidate on the Labor side.

 And what about interest rates?

High is bad, low is bad – ideally there would always be a mid-range rate that suits self-funded retirees as well as new (and prospective) home buyers.