The Dark Side of the Rainbow (Part 1)

How I accidentally fell into a fight to stop the sexualisation of my kids.

On 25th November 2022, our morning routine had gone well. It was time to take the kids to school and I was on a bit of a run with hitting my daily step goal, so I thought I’d walk my daughter to her primary school.

This led me to walk past the school office (not my normal path when driving to school) and to my surprise see a sign on the office door from the organisation Minus18 that read, “All Sexualities, Genders, Identities and Cultures Welcome Here.”

rainbow squad

How strange, I thought. For a start, kids don’t have sexualities, and there are only two genders at the school and in real life (boys and girls), and the school seemed like a welcoming place, so why did we need an inappropriate sign?

My daughter is quite a good reader and she could easily read this and ask me about it. I don’t want her to think about this, she’s six. She should be learning the fundamentals at school and having fun with her friends.

Speaking Up

What to do with this sign? Let it go, it’s just a sign? Or raise my concerns because if they’ve put up a sign like this, what else is going on that I’m not aware of?

After a week or so, I finally plucked up the courage to meet with the Principal. After an email with the school administration staff, we arranged for her to meet me on 6th December.

On the 6th, I headed into the school, extremely nervous. Hoping for a good outcome. Hoping to raise the issue of sexualising our kids and to get a fair hearing. But before I was even able to meet with the Principal as I arrived for our meeting, it became apparent that though I thought I’d come to speak about one poster, I was dealing with something much more significant.

When I walked into the office, I was met with multiple signs from the LGBTI+ movement. There was a giant rainbow flag hanging on the wall and multiple posters encouraging me to watch GAYBY BABY, telling me to be an ally, amongst other things. Now I’ve got no problem with people promoting their vision of the good life, but the sexualised nature of this seemed out of place in the office of a primary school.

So I was quite put off by what I saw in the office, but I tried not to let it worry me. Yes, we were no longer going to be talking about just one poster, but still, I was hoping we’d have a good meeting together.

Eventually, the Principal came out to meet me and we went to her office. This was probably the worst moment of my visit. As we walked in, I realised I wasn’t going to be having a chat with someone open to hearing me, but with what appeared to be a rainbow warrior.


The Principal’s office was quite stunning really. Her desk was draped in a rainbow flag. Her noticeboard was covered in LGBTI+ pamphlets and posters, and in the middle of them all was the Tasmanian State Premier, proudly telling me to become an ally.

Not only was the Principal drinking the Kool-Aid of sexualising our kids, but it seemed her office was designed to show me she did so with the backing of the government, all the way up to the Premier.

At this point, I should probably point out that if this was a secular club full of adults making up their own minds about how to live their lives, then in 21st-century Australia I’d expect a lot of rainbow information and LGBTI+ information. I’d also expect that as a Christian with traditional views to be in the minority.

But this is not an adult social club or secular workplace, it’s a school, and a primary school at that. And values and morals are the job of parents to impart to their children. Not only that, but there is something significantly different between homosexual identities and the gender fluidity/trans ideology flooding in under the rainbow flag. The two need to be separated.

But all that aside, as I sat there in the Principal’s office, to say I was put off by the sheer quantity of what I had seen in both offices is an understatement, and I don’t think our meeting went that well. I wasn’t as prepared as I should’ve been and she outgunned me. She didn’t agree that the poster was inappropriate, nor did she think it sexualised our kids.


I did however leave with one small win. The poster I argued was from an organisation that primary school kids had no business being made aware of (Minus18 — more on them another day) and in seeking to be inclusive, the sign actually excluded people of faith/religion (she tried to argue “cultures” included faith, but I explained quite clearly this is not the case).

I left the meeting overwhelmed, but with a verbal agreement from the Principal that she would take the sign down and put up a new sign that read “All Sexualities, Genders, Identities, Cultures, and FAITHS Welcome Here.” This would be more inclusive — and remove the Minus18 references from the school. Not ideal, but a small win I was happy to live with.

Two weeks passed. And the sign remained, though the Minus18 logo was taped over (and it was taped over on only one of the three copies of that sign I saw in the school). Where was the new sign?

Having had more time to reflect and having seen the Principal make no moves to do what she had said she would do, I sent her an email on 20th December saying I understood it was the end of the year and things were busy, so I’d made a better sign that was more inclusive. The sign was designed in the school colours and read, “Everyone Welcome Here.” I suggested she put this sign up as a good compromise that achieved maximum inclusion. How would she respond?


Her answer:

Thanks for your email. After our conversation, I spoke with staff and they were of the opinion that the word ‘identities’ encompasses ‘faith’.

Thank you for the poster you have developed, we’ll be happy to place those around the school too.

If I don’t see you again have a happy and safe holiday period and I look forward to seeing you again next year.


Rather shockingly, but perhaps unsurprisingly, she had completely dismissed me and failed to inform me of her intention to do nothing. One assumes that given our meeting was on 6 December that the conversation she referenced in her email to me on the 20th didn’t happen on the 19th and was most likely to have happened sometime in the week of the 12th-16th. We had a couple of back-and-forths where she continued to completely dismiss my concerns.

Later that day, I sent a long email to her outlining my concerns once again and my displeasure at her actions to marginalise me as a person of faith and sexualise our kids. I also noted that despite these disagreements, my desire was to work with her to see our school be a place where learners (students) thrive. I received no response, and have not to this day.

So what happened next? School holidays started the next day, and so we’ll pick the story up in Term 1 2023 (mid-March). I’d love to connect with you if you’ve had to face a battle like this in your school, especially if you’re in Tasmania, but anywhere really. Iron sharpens iron and the only way we can protect our kids is if we work together to defeat the sexualisation of children in secular education.  Subscribe to find out what happens next in my unfolding story.


Originally published at Chris’ Substack. Photo by Yan Krukau.

Thank the Source

Victorian MP’s Maiden Speech Was a Reckoning for the Political Elite

Moira Deeming’s maiden speech to the Victorian parliament was a reckoning for the Victorian Liberal National Party.

Leftist-lite Liberal Party leaders have every reason to fear her.

If not for her passion for truth, then for the very fact that the thunder of authenticity always sends the counterfeits running for cover.

No wonder over-polished, image-managed politicians were triggered.

Either the LNP is a son of Christ-centred Classical Liberalism, or they’re the sons of Cultural Marxism.

They cannot be both.

For those who stand with the latter, just look at who’s bemoaning the contents of Deeming’s speech.

Typical of Australia’s career politicians putting party self-interests over against the people, their instant vilification was a betrayal of their office.

A sad reminder of how reprobates, not representatives, have hijacked an institution once celebrated for its fierce appreciation for freedom of speech.

Strong Voice for Women and Children

Stepping up to support Deeming, Women’s Forum Australia called her words ‘phenomenal.’

On Facebook, the independent thinktank then described the speech as ‘pulling no punches’, adding, ‘Victorians are lucky to have her!

Quoting Deeming, WFA CEO Rachel Wong stated,

“An absolutely incredible maiden speech. Your unfailing courage and commitment to the rights and safety of women and children is an inspiration to us all. The suffragette colours were the icing on the cake.”

A Teacher’s Grave Concerns

What got Victoria’s leftist jihadists so riled up was Deeming exposing their extremism.

As a teacher, “I began to be very concerned about the things I was being told to teach,” Deeming explained.

“Lessons on tolerance were being replaced with lessons on inclusion. It wasn’t enough anymore to just accept each other’s differences with respect. Now students were required to affirm and celebrate beliefs they did not share.

“Perfectly reasonable, moral, and religious differences were being reframed as discriminatory, and intolerant. A new vocabulary was introduced categorising people as allies or enemies,” the LNP newcomer recounted.

The system put Acronym Inc. before ABCD, Deeming testified.

“Instead of being inspired by history’s heroes, students were being chastised and even told to stand up in class, and apologise for historical crimes that they had neither committed, nor condoned.”

These kids, Deeming said, were also being told what to think, rather than taught how to think.

Catastrophisers told kids, “the physical world is on the brink of doom, but rather than assigning research projects to find practical solutions, they were being assigned activism — including social media awareness-raising campaigns, ideological fundraisers, and attendance at protests during school hours.”

Deeming then voiced support for women in sports, boldly declaring, “Women and girls are suffering in Victoria because this government cannot or will not define what a female is… I call upon this government to immediately reinstate sex-based rights in the law.

“Curriculums have been radically altered, where primary school children were being subjected to erotic sexual content. Female students no longer had the right to single-sex sports teams, toilets, or change rooms.

“Teachers like me were being forced to lie to parents about their children who were secretly living as one gender at school, and another gender at home.”

It was here, Moira said, “I realised my teaching career was over. I would never do the things I was being asked to do… So now, here I am!”

This was a speech with the thunder of Wilberforce, the tenacity of Churchill, and the no-nonsense fury of Thatcher.

The war of woke being waged by its faux religious fanatics has made centrality a luxury liberty can no longer afford.


Originally published at Caldron Pool.

Thank the Source

Sydney WorldPride 2023 (17 February – 5 March)

In 2023, Sydney Mardi Gras and Sydney WorldPride unite to present a truly global LGBTQIA+ pride festival — the very first in the Southern Hemisphere.

The theme for the festival, GATHER, DREAM, AMPLIFY, was developed in partnership with our extraordinary First Nations and LGBTQIA+ communities. It acknowledges the traditional custodians of Australia and represents our commitment to equality and inclusion.

Sydney WorldPride will be calling. A calling to come together and participate in a global movement. (Sydney WorldPride 2023)

For two weeks, Australia’s biggest city, the capital of New South Wales, gets to host the Sydney WorldPride 2023; apparently, it is the first time this event has been held in the southern hemisphere.

I think I might have half-expected this to have been hosted in left-wing, Labor Party-controlled Melbourne, Victoria. But in right-wing, Liberal/National Coalition-controlled Sydney, New South Wales, this has taken me by surprise.

Political Consequences

On Saturday, 25 March 2023, New South Wales goes to the polls to elect our representatives for the next term of the NSW Parliament. There will be many NSW Liberal/National supporters reading the Daily Declaration (if you are reading this post, thank you so much). Do you support the heart of Sydney being taken over daily by Sydney WorldPride 2023 events and the public transport system being modified to service these happenings?

It seems to me that our representatives are desperate to craft their policies on their perception of the will of the people. If, like me, you don’t approve then don’t let your silence be interpreted as condoning the event. Last week I wrote to my NSW lower house representative and to the Premier, letting them know that as a Bible-believing Christian, I do not support this festival. I also suggested that I might not be supporting the Liberal/Nationals on 25 March as a result.

Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against the performers or the participants in these events. My concern is that because of the support from the Liberal/Nationals, I now feel let down and discriminated against for two weeks, as I am having to choose to keep away from the heart of Sydney, as these events are offensive to my values.

I believe that if we all write letters to our representatives and to the Premier, perhaps our voice will be heard. But even if our letters fall on deaf ears, we can’t be held accountable for letting evil flourish because good people said nothing! God will hear for sure, and the future is in His hands.


Photo: lovleah/BigStock

Thank the Source

What My Son’s Soccer Taught Me About the Gender Revolution

The question hit me with fresh force as I read it:

‘What gender is your child?’

I had read and answered similar questions before, at least about my gender. But this question from my son’s local soccer club about his gender gave the following options:

‘Male’, ‘female’, ‘prefer not to say’, or ‘gender fluid’.

Gender fluid. 

For a local soccer club (not to mention Football Australia) to ask whether your child is ‘gender-fluid’ made me realise something: the transgender revolution is not something out there amongst inner-city secular progressives who accept gender ideology. It’s now affecting everyone, including my children. Sure, we haven’t, as a family, signed onto the (trans)gender revolution. But our culture has, and in a big way.

Cultural Change

Just think about it: Five years ago, for a soccer club to ask if your child is gender fluid would have raised parental eyebrows. And ten years ago, such a question would have been unthinkable (most of us then didn’t even have a category for ‘gender fluid’).

But today, most soccer mums and dads shrug their shoulders and move on.

And across our culture, the number of gender non-conforming children has skyrocketed. Writing about the British Tavistock Centre and its Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS), author Hannah Barnes writes:

‘Since 2007 [GIDS] had grown from a small team that saw 50 young people each year to a nationally commissioned service treating thousands.’

And just as disturbingly, the people presenting at the clinic had changed:

‘Whereas most of the literature on gender non-conforming children was about boys who had a life-long sense of gender incongruence, GIDS’s waiting room was overpopulated with teenage girls whose distress around their gender had only started in adolescence.’

It’s the cultural sea we’re swimming in.

While these changes raise urgent questions — such as why the sudden increase in gender non-conforming adolescent girls? and how we care well for gender non-conforming people (especially children)?, my question is more basic:

How did such a moral revolution happen so quickly? 

It’s made me think of the various steps of moral revolutions outlined by English writer and thinker Theo Hobson. In his view, for a full moral reversal — a moral revolution — to take place, three conditions much be met:

1) What Was Condemned Must Be Celebrated

Until around 20 years ago, the Biblical (and historical) view of marriage as between one man and one woman was widely celebrated.

Heterosexuality was the norm, and there were only two genders (aligned with our sex). Anything outside that was seen as being outside the norm.

But today, homosexuality and gender fluidity aren’t merely tolerated as equal views: they are actively celebrated and promoted — even to schoolchildren. From Wear It Purple days to the mass marketing of Pride Week, all LGBTIQ identities are honoured and held up as good, true and beautiful.

2) What Was Celebrated Must Now Be Condemned

The Biblical understanding of marriage and gender is now condemned as oppressive and harmful.

Teaching these values to children is increasingly considered suspect, as the recent Australian Law Reform Commission Report argues. If you haven’t heard, the Federal Government tasked the Australian Law Reform Commission Report to report on religious schools and how to handle religious freedom. Its recent report argues for removing religious freedom protection for religious schools.

As Neil Foster, an Associate Professor of Law and expert on religious freedom, points out:

‘[The Report] effectively recommends the removal of protections enjoyed by religious educational institutions which have been designed to safeguard the ability of these organisations to operate in accordance with their religious beliefs. The “fences” protecting these bodies from being forced to conform to majority views on sexual behaviour and identity (and hence losing their distinctiveness as religious bodies) are to be knocked down, the ALRC says.’

 If the ALRC had its way, religious schools will no longer be allowed to be… religious. At least not when sexuality and gender are concerned.

What was celebrated must now be condemned — culturally and, increasingly, legally.

3) Those Who Will Not Join in Celebrating the Moral Revolution Must Be Condemned

The transgender moral revolution doesn’t believe in ‘live and let live’ disagreement.

You must be condemned if you have the audacity to raise some basic questions about the moral revolution. Just ask J.K. Rowling.

She was cancelled for raising the concern a few years ago that ‘trans-women’ (i.e. biological males identifying as women) are different from biological women.

But it’s not just celebrities and public figures that face cancellation if they speak up. Any parent who dares raise questions about why their daughter has to play against biological boys in a girls-only soccer competition will not be popular with the likes of The ABC or The Age.

Any religious leader who promotes Biblical sexuality is at risk of attack.

And if you’re an employee who doesn’t wear purple on said days, the questions from colleagues and HR will soon come, if they’re not already coming.

What Might Be Next?

While it’s impossible to know what’s next in the moral revolution, there are signs that it has overreached, at least regarding gender ideology. Like all revolutions that try and overturn God’s good creation order (communism, anyone?), reality has a way of pushing back and making itself known.

Many medical practitioners are raising questions about the ethics of carte blanche gender-affirming care. Regarding gender ideology, ‘de-transitioners’ — those that have transitioned but now regret it, are making their voices known. Some sporting bodies are pushing back against rules that allow biological males to compete against females. And even the secular-left newspapers like The New York Times have run articles questioning gender-affirming therapies of trans kids (earning the ire of LGBTIQ activists, in line with point #3, above).

Those are encouraging signs. But, on the other hand, perhaps this revolution has a long way to go before it burns itself out.


Originally published at Photo by Dominika Roseclay.

Thank the Source

We Will Not Remain Silent At This Time: The Church’s Responsibility in 2023

We cannot remain silent in the face of evil and sin. God calls us to stand up for the truth that brings healing and eternal life to His beloved children. We must help those who have gone astray.

Years ago, my wife, children and I attended an event in Brisbane called ‘Fearless: Cultivating Courage’, organised by Lyle Shelton and the Australian Christian Lobby.

Fearless - not silent

It was April 2016.

The Trojan horse of gay ‘marriage’ was at the nation’s gate and hundreds of Christians had eagerly gathered to hear American author and conservative radio host Eric Metaxas speak about courage and the cost of standing for truth.

There was a weightiness about the gathering.

Those who had made the effort to be at the meeting knew the stakes were high, and that those awake to the threat — even among Christians — were relatively small in number.


Shelton opened the meeting by speaking about the fight to preserve the sanctity of marriage. His gentle warning, about the demonising of Christians in the media and planned protests at upcoming ACL events, brought to my mind Martin Luther King Jr.’s warning to civil rights marchers in 1968 of “difficult days ahead”.

Today in 2023 — just eight years later — Christians are in the fight of their lives.

There was a reason a sense of sobriety came over me during that meeting. The ‘city gates’ have long been flung open now to the Trojan horse of gay ‘marriage’ and, true to the mythological account, hordes of our enemies have flooded the city under the cover of darkness.

The Procession of the Trojan Horse in Troy by Giovanni Domenico Tiepolo

As Christians, it seems we have our backs to the wall.


In that cool evening of 2016, Metaxas spoke much about laying down one’s life. “Faith without works is dead,” he reminded us, quoting from the second chapter of James.

For most Western Christians, Metaxas suggested, our struggle against sin has not really been unto bloodshed. But, he concluded, the times they are a-changing and there are difficult days ahead.

Metaxas shared insights from the momentous life of Dietrich Bonhoeffer.

This was a man who stood up against no less than the might of the Nazi regime. As a Christian pastor, he walked a lonely road of resistance against Hitler and his evil regime, while the church in Germany slumbered.

For Bonhoeffer, the time came when even the Lutheran Church disowned him. Just weeks before Hitler’s defeat and the end of World War II, Bonhoeffer would pay the ultimate price.

After spending two years in prison, the 39-year-old pastor was sent to the gallows, where he departed his earthly tent and stepped into glory to receive his crown.

“When Christ calls a man, He bids him come and die.” 
— Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship (1937)

God’s Will

In his 1968 ‘Mountaintop’ speech, Martin Luther King Jr. spoke about “difficult days ahead” for the non-violent, civil rights movement he was leading.

He shared that he did not fear man and that he did not fear death — his only desire was “to do God’s will.” Like anyone, he wanted to live a long life, but he was prepared to lay that desire down.

Luther King Jr.’s words proved prophetic and the Mountaintop speech would be his last public address.

The following evening, he was gunned down and killed as he stepped onto the balcony of his Memphis motel. He too was 39 years old.

“When I took up the cross, I recognised its meaning…
The cross is something that you bear, and ultimately that you die on.”
— Martin Luther King Jr. (22 May, 1967)
Penn Community Center, Frogmore, South Carolina

“For whosoever will save his life shall lose it:
and whosoever will lose his life for My sake shall find it.”
— Jesus, the Christ. Matthew 16:25

Today we are living in a hostile environment for Christians and witnessing a flood of depravity.

Love for Christ compels us to speak.

Love for the hurting and oppressed means we cannot remain silent.

As a church, we must speak and be counted among the remnant who will not bow the knee to evil, God-dishonouring laws. Our reputations and earthly gains — perhaps even our lives — will be required of us.

Take Courage

On Sunday 12 February, on the one-year anniversary of the March on National Parliament and the biggest peaceful protest in Australia’s history, I was asked to preach in my home church.

Glory to God, we experienced revival as believers caught a Heavenly vision of the church and answered the call to speak boldly, even in the face of death.

What do we have that we have not been given? Our influence and prosperity and privileged position as Western Christians must be offered back to our Lord in selfless sacrifice.

The words of Mordecai to Esther, during their time of testing, are a prophetic message to the church today:

Do not imagine that you in the king’s palace can escape any more than all the Jews.

For if you remain silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place, and you and your father’s house will perish.

And who knows but that you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this.
~ Esther 4:13-14


Photo by Soul Winners For Christ.

Thank the Source

Rebuke and Love

A Leviticus account of rebuke and love.

The book of Leviticus contains instruction for the priests and people of Israel, so that they might be holy and live in the presence of God. For some contemporary readers, Leviticus 19:17-18 seems to contain a conflict between the commands to “rebuke your neighbour” and to “love your neighbour as yourself.”

The verse reads:

17 ‘You shall not hate your fellow countryman in your heart;
you may certainly rebuke your neighbour,
but you are not to incur sin because of him.
18 You shall not take vengeance,
nor hold any grudge against the sons of your people,
but you shall love your neighbour as yourself; I am the Lord.

This conflict, however, is only seeming. Rebuke, when done out of love, is a loving act, restoring the offender back into relation with God and the community as a whole. In fact, to fail to rebuke can lead the offended party to sin by committing hateful acts against the offender.

Complete Sanctity

Leviticus is the third book of the Pentateuch, containing laws particular to attaining and maintaining holiness. The God of Israel is maximally holy, and all that is impure in His presence is destroyed. This means that the Israelites had to practice holiness in order to come into God’s presence and offer sacrifices, which were necessary for atonement and thanksgiving (Lv. 19:2).

Holiness was more than just moral excellence, but was the practice of imitating God’s goodness in all aspects of life.

For some readers, the command to both rebuke and love one’s neighbour are juxtaposed — making judgements, and confronting someone about their wrongdoing, does not seem to be very loving behaviour. This seems to be a very common belief today. Our culture worships an idol of comfort, and far too many Christians are complacent and worried about offending the ‘followers of comfort.’

However, it is a non-issue historically. In fact, the two commands enlighten one another and indicate exactly what each requires in order for the people of God to best imitate God’s holiness.

Course Correction

It is first helpful to notice the parallels in these verses. Both verses contain a prohibition (to not hate/take vengeance), remedy (rebuke/love your neighbour), and rationale (incur no sin/‘I am the Lord’ i.e., be holy). It is the remedy commands that some readers struggle to reconcile. It is proper then to analyse the remedies in light of their prohibitions and rationale.

The prohibition of hate in the heart (v. 17) seems to focus on one’s thoughts and feelings toward another. Instead of hating your fellow Israelite when they trespass you, you are commanded to rebuke them — this term יָכַח (yakach) can also be understood in the sense of being “set right.” In Scripture, reproof is often associated with wisdom (e.g., Pr. 9:8; 10:17), referring to judgement, reasoning, and correction.

The antithesis to hate in the heart is rebuke in the open (i.e., Pr. 27:5). Rebuke removes possible misunderstandings, dispels hate, and opens up an opportunity for communion between the offender and the offended — grievances can be resolved, and the offender can be corrected (that is, be put back on the path to holiness).

Festering Resentment

The rationale given for this command is the avoidance of sinning out of hatred. Hatred can lead to sins varying from anger to murder. This was the case for Absalom, who would eventually have Amnon murdered, after avoiding him and repressing his anger for two years (2 Sm. 13).

One might easily argue that even just the failure to reprove is a sin in itself, as was the (similar) case for “the watchman” of Ezekiel 33, who would bear the punishment of the wicked if he failed to warn them of their wickedness (Ez. 33:8). Rebuking the neighbour is proper, but hating the neighbour is a sin. Interestingly, at Qumran, reproof was not only a moral duty, but a cardinal requirement.

The prohibition against taking vengeance and grudge-nursing (v. 18) functions also as a prohibition of actions and thoughts that result from hatred. Even if the offender does not respond appropriately to reproof, hatred is forbidden. It is for God to distribute justice (De. 32:35a), for only He has the wisdom, power, and authority to do so.

On the matter of how one ought to reprove, this prohibition indicates that to rebuke in anger, or in front of others, is an act of vengeance, and is therefore a sin. Similarly, to refuse to rebuke may be an act of grudge-nursing. The remedy command is to love, referring not just to an emotion, but actions also. The term אַהַב (ahab) is “love” in the sense of affection, reaching out, and befriending. Inner and outer love was a prerequisite for holiness.

True Love

It is a matter of debate as to whether the following כָּמ֑וֹךָ (kemo) modifies “love” and should be translated as “as yourself” — meaning that as one seeks to provide for their own needs, one must seek to provide for the needs for their neighbour. On the other hand, should it modify “your neighbour” and be translated as “as a man like yourself,” the command is that one must love their fellow Israelite because he is made in God’s image and is in a covenant with Him, just as he is also. [Along a similar vein, Gn. 5:1 has often been regarded as the great principle of the Torah — though some have regarded Lv. 19:18 as such.]

Particularly suited to the latter translation, the rationale for the command to love is the fact that God is holy — “I am the Lord.” The Israelite is called to love his fellow covenant people. In light of this, one must graciously rebuke his neighbour out of love for him, so that he might be holy. The command to rebuke is therefore a call to speak truth in love (as would be later articulated in Ep. 4:15). [Note that the use of verse 18 to interpret verse 17 is proper, as it was and is commonplace for biblical laws to be interpreted with regard to the love command.]

Given what has been discussed above, it should be apparent that the commands to rebuke and love are harmonious. The conflict only exists in the eyes of those who believe love is relative, or that love can only truly manifest itself through supportive and affirming behaviours. Today, the popular sense is that loving one’s neighbour requires a full acceptance of who they are (that is, not judging them) — that we ought to avoid those convicting and uncomfortable conversations, because we should never “impose” morals on another person.

Readers must keep in mind that ancient Israel was essentially theocratic — their practices, laws, and governing systems were divinely inspired. There is no instance (at least not in the modern sense) of one Israelite “imposing” their morals upon another. All members of this society were motivated to strive for holiness, so that they might live in the presence of God and be blessed by Him. Their morals were grounded in God’s standard.

In this setting, rebuke can be regarded as an accountability tool, as well as a means of restoring the offender to communion with God and his Israelite neighbour. This, surely, when done with gentle kindness and genuine concern, was a necessary and loving act. Israelites were called to reflect God’s holiness by loving and caring for the needs, holiness, and spiritual/moral state of their neighbours.

One must also note that God, in the Hebrew Scriptures, is recorded as rebuking and punishing Israel, so that they might return to Him and restore the covenant relationship (e.g., Judges; Pr. 3:12; the prophets). Should one then propose that His behaviour here conflicts with His loving nature — or that He is somehow behaving irrationally? It would be highly controversial to propose so.

Stages of Fraternal Correction

Jesus affirmed this union of rebuke and love in both word and deed.

As recorded in Matthew 18:15-17, Jesus commands His followers to rebuke each other lovingly. So as not to embarrass the offender, the offended should confront him privately — not gossip about him to others. If the rebuke proves ineffective, one is to bring witnesses to rebuke him again. Further still, if the offender remains unrepentant, the matter is brought to the church community. If the offender still refuses to heed the rebuke, he is to be cut off from the community — he can no longer be considered a Christ-follower.

Like the desire for holiness in ancient Israel, Jesus is concerned for the holiness of His church and the righteousness of its members. The rebuke is borne from a heart of love for the neighbour and the community as a whole. In Luke 17:3-4, Jesus describes a close relationship between rebuke and forgiveness. A person may not hold a grudge, but must forgive his neighbour when he repents of his wrongdoing.

Some readers will improperly take Jesus’ command not to judge (Mt. 7:1) apart from the verses that follow. This, however, is not a call to never rebuke one’s neighbour, but is a call to abandon hypocrisy. Those who rebuke should not themselves reject rebuke. One should not correct another’s error until he recognises his own personal failings.

Israel Ba’al Shem Tov rephrases the love command as follows: “Just as we love ourselves despite the faults we know we have, so we should love our fellows despite the faults we see in them.” A reader might identify a separation between the act and the person — the believer is commanded to rebuke the sinful action out of love for the person, who is created in God’s image, and expect the same.

As it was for ancient Israel, the command to rebuke is aimed particularly at those within the community, toward other members. The command to love, however, seems to be applied universally (Mt. 5:44; 22:29), and just as with Leviticus 19:18, Jesus teaches that love implies deeds (Mt. 7:12). Christians are called to rebuke and, in particular, to rebuke one another — but we are called to love all people.

Jesus also embodied the command to rebuke and love through His actions. For example, Jesus loved the adulterous woman when He prevented her from being stoned and rebuked her when He told her to “sin no more” (Jn. 8:11). Similarly, when He healed an infirm man and commanded him to stop sinning (Jn. 5:1-15).

God’s Kingdom Come

Rebuke, when done in a loving manner and with a loving heart, is a tool of love. In fact, in the New Testament, the most common Greek verb for “rebuke” is ἐπιτιμαω, which is an amalgamation of ἐπι, “on” (move/place/locate on/in, in the time of, on the basis of), and τιμαω, “I honour, value.” Ἐπιτιμαω, therefore, means literally “to place honour.” It’s restorative. Jesus’ ministry, as the Messiah, was to proclaim the Kingdom of God, which was holy. He loved people, and so He taught, rebuked, and died for them, so that they might be regarded as holy and enter (i.e., be restored into) the Kingdom.

In Leviticus, rebuke and love are regarded as necessary for the holiness of oneself and one’s neighbour. Out of loving concern for their fellow Israelites’ moral purity, as well as their own, God’s people were commanded to rebuke their neighbour, directing them back into communion with God and the community. Likewise, Christ rebuked those He deeply loved so that they might become holy.

Earlier, when I spoke of the ‘followers of comfort,’ I was not only referring to non-believers. Many Christians have slipped into the cult of comfort. They refuse to be a light toward each other, let alone the world — but we are called to be salt, not sugar. We are called to walk amongst wolves, not to walk on eggshells. We are called to transform, not conform. Avoiding discomfort is a secular etiquette.

Do not put eternal souls in peril for the sake of temporal unity. If you love your neighbour, rebuke him.


cf. The Walk. Photo by Tima Miroshnichenko.

Thank the Source

Bethany Hamilton and the Courage of Esther for Such a Time as This

Inspirational Christian speaker, mentor and surfing champion Bethany Hamilton has made international headlines for having the audacity to speak out against the outrageous new transgender policy of the World Surfing League.

Bethany has declared she “won’t be competing in or supporting the World Surfing League if this rule remains.” By speaking up for truth, righteousness, and common sense in the face of transgender faddism, Bethany has made herself a target and demonstrated the courage of Esther of old.

Speak Up

We would do well to appreciate the courage of Esther in these days and understand the spiritual importance of risking all to speak truth. We must be prepared to defend conscience, uphold righteousness and declare truth, whatever the cost.

To play it safe and remain silent in the face of evil is not only cowardly — it is deadly. To speak boldly is to fear God and experience His presence and witness His miraculous interventions. Let’s not short-change ourselves, to our own demise.

The Biblical account of Esther, queen of Persia, is set around 480 B.C. She is remembered and celebrated as the courageous queen of common origin who appeared before the king to speak on behalf of her people, at the risk of her life.

And so will I go in unto the king, which is not according to the law: and if I perish, I perish.
~ Esther 4:16

Esther’s story of rising from humble origins provides many insights. As a young peasant woman, Esther won the king’s heart and attained the influence, comforts, and personal security that accompany royalty.

Esther’s integrity, however, was never corroded by privilege. When required, she was prepared to lay everything down — even life itself — for the greater cause.


Esther had an almost fairytale ascendancy to the throne. The king of the land, in search of a new bride, chose her from hundreds of hopeful, young maidens. Esther’s beauty and grace captured his heart and she stepped from obscurity into the high estate of royalty.


Queen Esther

As Esther became accustomed to the ease and dignity of royal life, one might have expected her to hold on to what she had at any cost. What possible reason would there ever be to ‘rock the boat’ or risk what had fortuitously become hers?

Esther, however, was a woman of principle — a woman of conviction. A conviction that is worth something, always costs something. Esther’s convictions would be tested to the limit.

What were Esther’s convictions worth? What would they cost her? Were they worth more than her fame and fortune? Were they worth more than her title and influence? Were they worth more than her personal ease and security? Indeed, were her convictions worth more than life itself? All would be tested.

Rare Gem

Mordecai raised Esther well. He didn’t gift her with beauty. That was her natural inheritance. And while Mordecai had no earthly riches with which to establish his young, orphaned cousin, he did substantially invest in her.

When a rare opportunity arose for a common girl to become queen, Esther stepped forth with more than her natural beauty. Thanks to Mordecai’s tutelage, she appeared on Persia’s stage with a poise beyond her years, a strong connection to her Jewish heritage, and a stockpile of the faith especially reserved for the poor of this world.

And the king loved Esther above all the women, and she obtained grace and favour in his sight more than all the virgins; so that he set the royal crown upon her head and made her queen instead of Vashti.
~ Esther 2:17

Esther rose to prominence in Persia (circa 480 BC) for a purpose she had yet to discover. She came to the kingdom at a divinely appointed time in order to expose a conspiracy against her people and to help deliver them from certain destruction.

The church too has been gifted with heavenly beauty and she has become influential in the kingdoms of men. She too has been invited into the highest spheres of influence.

At an individual level, many Christians in the West enjoy social acceptance, career success, financial security, and political influence. We are, like Esther, in the royal courts. Like the Jews in Esther’s day, Christians have flourished. Like the Hebrews in Moses’ day, Christians have become numerous in the land.


Christians may have different perspectives on moral issues. There may be room for debate and interpretation on certain matters. And then there are ‘line-in-the-sand’ issues. These are matters of deep conviction and moral certainty for Bible-believing Christians, and they serve to separate the sheep from the goats.

In Mordecai’s day, the line in the sand was bowing down to an egotistical official named Haman. Today, the line in the sand is bowing to ‘same-sex marriage’ and the transgender usurpation of the natural order that it has spawned. The term ‘same-sex marriage’ itself is a misnomer. Marriage was, is, and can only be, between a man and a woman.

Reflecting on the history of the legal redefinition of marriage in Australia, noisy LGBTIQA lobbyists campaigned along the lines that it was a noble cause for human rights. Homosexual civil partnerships, however, already had the same rights and protections as married couples, including property, parental, and estate rights.


With existing legal equality and community acceptance for homosexual relationships, why then did gay and lesbian lobby groups have their sights so persistently set on marriage? The answer is that it was never about human rights — it was about securing a symbolic victory.

When French revolutionaries captured the Bastille in 1789, it was a symbolic victory. The occupation of the royal fortress by the revolutionaries announced the end of the old order.

storming Bastille

In the same way, the wresting of marriage by homosexuals – wherever it has taken place in the world – signals the collapse of the Judeo-Christian order.

This is what the redefinition of marriage was really about. Wherever it has taken place, the freedoms of speech and religion have been diminished, traditional family units have been undermined, and nonsensical gender fluidity theories have proliferated. The aggressive LGBTIQA agenda has surreptitiously set conscientiously-objecting Christians on a collision course with the state.


The antagonist in Esther’s day was a man named Haman. He was not content with civil respect and appropriate recognition of his position. He craved obeisance. He did not feel secure unless he had the fawning worship of the people.

When Mordecai could not (for fear of God) bow his knee to Haman, his humble and conscientious objection was misread as a personal and defiant rejection of the man himself. The insecure and raging civic leader became irrationally punitive and set out to kill a good man — a man who had prepared a beautiful and graceful future queen and a man who had once even saved the king’s life.

Mordecai was a man of conviction and his peaceful, conscientious objection to an immoral law was framed as sedition, warranting the death penalty.

Mordecai would not bow

Not content to just destroy Mordecai, Haman set out to eradicate the entire ‘troublesome’ race of Jews. Haman could not and would not tolerate dissent, no matter how peaceful the protest.

Haman’s position must be celebrated and applauded. He was not satisfied with appropriate civic recognition. He demanded worship. And he raged and plotted when he didn’t get it.

When Haman saw that Mordecai neither bowed down nor paid homage to him, Haman was filled with rage.

But he disdained to lay hands on Mordecai alone, for they had told him who the people of Mordecai were, therefore Haman sought to destroy all the Jews, the people of Mordecai, who were throughout the whole kingdom of Ahasuerus.
~ Esther 3:5-6

Little did Haman know that Mordecai’s race included the queen herself, and it was her courage that would deliver God’s people and bring about Haman’s demise. Haman would ultimately hang on the gallows he prepared for Mordecai.

Demanding Total Surrender

Mordecai’s reproach is felt by good people today. The redefinition of marriage to include homosexuals was loudly declared as the progressive, enlightened path. Dissent to the clamouring demand for ‘marriage equality’ proved costly at the time.

Australian tennis legend Margaret Court endured public ridicule and threats to remove her name from a Melbourne tennis arena because she dared to voice disagreement. Coopers Brewery was pressured into a snivelling, public apology for its product’s placement in a public (and polite) conversation between two politicians about the redefinition of marriage. Seventy ordinary Australians were physically jostled and ultimately barred from attending a public lecture by a Sydney University academic who voiced concerns about gender fluidity theory.

Christians were pressured to applaud the agenda of the homosexual lobby or remain silent. Respectful tolerance and civil recognition of homosexual unions were not enough. You either had to be an enthusiast for redefining marriage to accommodate homosexuals, or else you were homophobic and bigoted.

Our Lord Jesus Christ designed and differentiated male and female. It is He who defined marriage.

And Jesus answered and said, “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?

So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.”
~ Matthew 19:4-6

It is not an option for Bible-believing Christians to be enthusiasts of ‘same-sex marriage’ or transgenderism. In a brave new world of ‘same-sex marriages’ and everything else that has followed, have we now become, by default, enemies of the state? Are Christians being corralled by a treacherous minority into a collision course with the authorities?

Governments do not want enmity with Christians. Christians are the salt of the earth. Bible-believing churches underpin peaceful and stable societies and Christians lead the way in serving the poor and disadvantaged.

Minority Pressure

Unfairly falling foul of the governing authorities is not new for God’s people.

Years before Mordecai and Esther, another Persian king was hoodwinked by a devious cabal. King Darius found himself pitted against his most loyal servant in Daniel, thanks to a small group of conspirators. Hundreds of years later, the Prince of Peace himself was crucified by an unwilling Roman governor held to ransom by a cunning Pharisaical faction.

In modern times, governments have also shown susceptibility to being manipulated by pressure groups to the detriment of decent, hard-working, salt-of-the-earth types.

Mordecai, Daniel, Christ our Lord — none of these men were looking for trouble, and neither are Christians. We are decent people who live according to our convictions, and we have a preserving and refining influence in society.

Daniel prayed


The story ends well for Mordecai and Esther and their countrymen. “When the enemy comes in like a flood, the Spirit of the LORD will lift up a standard against him” (Isaiah 59:19). While Haman plotted and schemed, he hadn’t counted on two things.

Firstly, there was a Jew in the highest office of the land. Haman didn’t know that the beautiful Esther, in whom the king’s heart was enthralled, was none other than a Jewess and therefore the target of his rage. And secondly, Haman didn’t realise that this hidden, beloved woman of Mordecai’s race would have the courage to reveal herself and put everything on the line to save her people.

There are Esther types today in all spheres of society. They can read the writing on the wall and they can see that Bible-believing Christians have fallen foul of a ruthless LGBTIQA lobby. At some point, they will have to make an Esther-type decision.

Will I speak out and be labelled a bigoted, outdated, enemy of progress and equality? What if I offend people I care about? What if I damage my reputation? What if I sabotage my career? What if I make myself a target? Surely God has not gifted me my enviable station in life for me to throw it all away because of an ‘opinion’ on marriage or gender identity?

Is it an opinion or is it a conviction? Are we people of conviction or convenience? Are we heralds of truth? As was the case with Esther, so it is with us. God has indeed placed us in our current callings and places of influence for such a time as this. What will we do with what we have?

May we, like Bethany Hamilton and others, rise to the occasion. Our lives, and the lives of our families, are at stake.

Then Mordecai told them to reply to Esther, “Do not think to yourself that in the king’s palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silent at this time, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father’s house will perish. 

And who knows whether you have not come to the kingdom for such a time as this?” (Est 4:13-14)


Photos: Bethany Hamilton, Facebook

Thank the Source

Alice Springs Violence: Who Has the Answers?

We are living in an era where social breakdown and moral decay are drawing heavily on the state’s resources and collective wisdom. The elucidative bankruptcy of the state’s ‘wise men’ is being exposed, as surely as it was in the ancient empires of Egypt and Babylon.

The next morning Pharaoh was very disturbed by the dreams. So he called for all the magicians and wise men of Egypt. When Pharaoh told them his dreams, not one of them could tell him what they meant. ~ Genesis 41:8 

The Chaldeans answered the king and said, “There is not a man on earth who can meet the king’s demand, for no great and powerful king has asked such a thing of any magician or enchanter or Chaldean.” ~ Daniel 2:10

Take the very broken town of Alice Springs, for example. Overnight reports of an axe attack on a teenager by three indigenous youth is just one violent incident among countless attacks occurring every day in Alice Springs. Our governments appear at a complete loss as to what to do. The ‘wise men’ have no answers.

Generational Trauma

Years ago, I closely followed the violence that erupted in Aurukun, Queensland when teachers were twice evacuated after children threatened the principal with knives and machetes. Seven years on, Aurukun still resembles a war zone. Recent reports reveal dwindling attendance at the school, the closure of essential services, a council without a CEO, and residents walking the streets with metal fence pickets and crossbows. Many locals are reluctant to leave their homes.

Many of the insights I gained, as I studied Aurukun’s widely discussed demise in 2016, apply to the collapse into chaos of Alice Springs. There is talk of rugby league identities coming to Alice Springs to help in some way. This reminds me of the goodwill demonstrated in 2016 by Australian rugby league player, Johnathan Thurston, when he used a post-State-of-Origin interview to encourage children in the embattled community of Aurukun. “There’s obviously been a lot of trouble up there,” he said, “so to all the students there, I just want you to believe in yourselves and keep turning up to school.” The following day, an Aurukun teacher reported that the children cheered when they heard Thurston reaching out to them.

And yet for all such gestures of goodwill by celebrities like Thurston, and for all the strategising by government agencies, I don’t think all the king’s horses and all the king’s men can put Alice Spring back together again, anymore than they could put Aurukun back together again. A certain wisdom is needed that transcends the most brilliant intellect of fallen men.

Exploitation and Alcoholism

Common to both the demise of Aurukun and the ruin of Alice Springs is the sidelining of the church and the introduction of alcohol. For Aurukun, the decade following the introduction of alcohol was the darkest decade in the history of the community. Herbert Yunkaporta, a pastor born and raised in Aurukun, laments, “I’ll tell you this: the community is asleep. When did they go to sleep? In the mid-eighties. This is a deep crisis. Aurukun needs help.” There must have been a cry of lament in Alice Springs by many Aboriginal elders when alcohol restrictions were removed six months ago.

Insights from the demise of Aurukun can help in understanding the lawlessness on display in Alice Springs. Aurukun’s history is a tragic story that begins with broken promises and broken dreams. It is a story of Goliath-like state and corporate interests outmuscling local and cultural leadership in a greedy grab for Aurukun’s vast bauxite reserves. It was Aurukun’s buried treasure that attracted mining leases and state administrators in the 1970s, followed by the imposition of a wet canteen in the 1980s. In the face of vehement objection by community elders, trucks laden with beer rolled into the town in 1985 and Aurukun took a nosedive.

Faith and Prosperity

It’s hard to imagine that, as recently as 1970, there was no hint of the misery that would engulf Aurukun. Professor Sutton describes his experience of Aurukun in the early 1970s:

Suicide was unknown. People who survived the rigours of infancy and early childhood had a good chance of living to their seventies…

Local men mustered cattle and ran the local butcher shop, logged and sawed the timber for house building, built the housing and other constructions, welded and fixed vehicles in the workshop, and worked in the vegetable gardens, under a minimal set of mission supervisors.

Women not wholly engaged in child-rearing worked in the general store, clothing store, school, hospital and post office.

(The Politics of Suffering, Melbourne University Press, 2010, p. 40)

This somewhat idyllic life, as described by Sutton, was the peaceful and industrious heritage left by the Presbyterian Church and the Archer River Mission Station. Despite being poorly funded, and notwithstanding its shortcomings, the mission station founded in 1904 is remembered for being supportive of Aboriginal rights and self-determination.

Aurukun sawmill circa 1950

Aurukun sawmill, circa 1950. State Library of Queensland.

Natasha Robinson reports that in 1975, the “progressive [Presbyterian] church was advocating land rights, bilingual education and a return to outstation life.” A Queensland Government report describes the mission superintendents from 1924 to 1965, Rev. Bill Mackenzie and his wife, as being “unusually liberal in their support for their continuation of Bora traditions, traditional hunting and the use of Wik languages.”

Without a doubt, the church played an essential role in laying the platform for the 1970s optimism and social cohesion that existed in Aurukun. There was hope and resourcefulness in the community, a healthy work ethic, a trustworthy moral compass, and emerging cultural leadership.

Secularism and Moral Decay

While it’s not popular to say these days, the church led the Aboriginal community well and was the chief supporter of Aurukun’s journey to self-determination. Tragically, the church would be sidelined as the lucre and liquor interests exploited Aurukun and sabotaged its promising future. This tragedy in Aurukun is not dissimilar to that facing Alice Springs.

There is a direct correlation between social breakdown and moral decay and the sidelining of the church. This is evident in Aurukun, Alice Springs, and indeed in towns and cities across Australia. The church is irreplaceable as both preserving agent and physician. Where the church is maligned and neutralised (as in the case of Joseph in Egypt and Daniel in Babylon), the state finds itself ill-equipped to halt moral decay or heal society’s wounds.

Both ancient and modern history teach us that the silencing and imprisoning of the church is never in the interest of society. Hitler scorched Germany’s soul with his murderous agenda — something he could only achieve with the church rendered dormant. With the exception of lone prophetic voices, like Lutheran pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer, there was little moral resistance to Hitler. The removal of the church and its prophetic voice left Germany in great darkness.

Greg Sheridan describes the rise of a “new religion of aggressive secularism” that is filling a void in Australia that used to be occupied by the church. While this aggressive secularism is “more self-confident and fundamentalist than ever,” he astutely observes that the western church is nowhere to be seen or heard because, “widespread, prolonged affluence has been more effective than oppression ever was in killing religious belief and practice.”

I know where Sheridan is coming from. While we have not really known tribulation and persecution, the cares of life and the deceitfulness of riches have been effective in choking out the potent Word of God and rendering the western church unfruitful.

Losing Our Savour

Jesus warned about the church losing relevance. He warned that if the salt loses its saltiness, and its preservation qualities are squandered; it is good for nothing except road base (Matthew 5:13). He taught that lamps that no longer provide light must be removed (Revelation 2:5). The western church would do well to heed these warnings and strengthen the things that remain.

In many ways, we have failed in our responsibility to be salt and light in the world. Many young people in the western church have been short-changed. Rather than energising them and capturing their hearts with a truly noble cause to die for, church leaders have fed them entertainment and the merits of upward social mobility.

The church always thrives when it believes and embraces its true mission statement, as taught by Christ himself. “If any man would come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me.” Self-denial, humility, and servanthood may have never been attractive, worldly ideals but these qualities underpin a satisfying and meaningful life and they give the church relevance.

The church, when true to form, has the power to provide young people with vision and intrinsic motivation for living a purposeful and selfless life. This is what Aurukun had, I believe. And this is what Aurukun and Alice Springs and Australia need today. This is what worked for David Wilkerson, founder of Teen Challenge, when he spent himself for New York’s bloodthirsty gangs in the late 1950s.

The church is the remedy to society’s ills. It is the preserving agent against moral decay and social breakdown. It is the steward of the Balm of Gilead that alone can heal the most broken lives. I remain a believer in the power of the Gospel message and what it can achieve when lived out. However, the western church has dropped the ball and we have work to do. And it is in our current, seemingly ‘irrelevant’ condition that we must once again prove our worth.

Ironically, the church is facing a fight for its existence at a time when our nation needs us the most. As a pastor and man of God, Herbert Yunkaporta knows the answer for Aurukun and troubled communities like Alice Springs.

“Aurukun needs to be awakened. When we throw a rock in the water, where does the ripple effect begin? From the inside out. We want to make a ripple effect in each and every individual man and young man, by helping them to restore what was lost.”

The hope for mankind and for our communities truly is a change in the human heart; a transformation of the human condition. And only the living organism, that is the church, can offer that miraculous remedy.

It is through the power of the Gospel that broken men and women receive true cleansing, a new heart, and the energising presence of the Creator Himself. It is in the God-breathed Scriptures that we find the blueprint for peaceful and productive societies. Australia boasts natural resources and underground treasure that are the envy of the world.

And yet it will be the rediscovery of the treasure in our people that will lead to the freedom and triumph of troubled towns like Aurukun and Alice Springs. Exploration companies and mining interests cannot help here. The state must ask for the church’s help. The church alone is the steward of the Gospel, wherein is the power to transform men and women “from the inside out.”

Reginald Arthur, Joseph interpreting Pharaoh's dream (1893-1894)

Reginald Arthur, Joseph interpreting Pharaoh’s dream (1893-1894)

And Pharaoh said to his servants,
“Can we find a man like this, in whom is the Spirit of God?”
Then Pharaoh said to Joseph,
“Since God has shown you all this,
there is none so discerning and wise as you are.”
~ Genesis 41:38-39


Photo by Ketut Subiyanto.

Thank the Source


Please help truthPeep spread the word :)