It was God’s will that he be crucified to pay the penalty for our transgressions and iniquities. They lowered him from the cross on which he died, wrapped him in burial robes, and threw him in a tomb in time to participate in the Passover. Night turned to day, day to night, night to day. Some of his followers came dejected to dress him for burial in a manner more befitting a man of his stature than the common criminal he was treated as so few days before. He was not there. The stone had rolled away.

“But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” - 1 Corinthians 15:20-22

Christ’s resurrection was a key necessity in our salvation. Had he died and not risen, he could not justify his claim to hold the power over life and death. We would still be in our sins, for he would not be the perfect sacrifice he said he was, and that the prophets beforehand prophesied would come. For it is through Christ’s death and resurrection that our old natures are put to death and we are raised to new life in him. Through his death we have confidence as those whom God has called that we are justified in his sight. In his resurrection we are brought back to life from the death we died with Adam.

Having therefore died with Him to sin, let us live for Him in service and to His glory. Because the tomb is empty.Continue Reading >>

A man of humble origins, from the back-blocks of the far-flung rural outpost of an empire, starts a speaking tour. A carpenter by trade, he rises to some prominence before being crucified by the authorities. Small footnote in the history of the region, possibly? A man of no form or majesty that we would look upon him and see him for who he was. Yet God works in mysterious ways.

“But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.” - Isaiah 53:5

We cannot save ourselves, we cannot make ourselves right with God. So God the Father sent his Son to pay the penalty for our sins. For our transgressions he was wounded, for our sins he was crushed. He bore the chastisement that brought us to be at peace with God. What a wonderful gift to give – one's life for the life of others. Nailed to a cross to redeem his chosen from the helpless race of Adam. A man of humble origins, the saviour and redeemer of God's elect. A man of no form or majesty that we should behold him proves to be the greatest man in history.

It is easy to read these words and view them in the abstract. How great God is, how wonderful a thing to do! But these words are far more than mere words recited at a time of year, or a doctrine to write in chapter of a theological textbook. These words are more than a prophecy, they are words of great comfort. They should be words that every Christian bears close to their heart. Personalise it:

He was wounded for my transgressions, he was crushed for my sins: upon him was the chastisement that brought me peace with God; and by his stripes I am healed. Because of my failure to meet God's standard of righteousness and holiness, he was wounded and crushed for me. He was chastised and mocked, belittled so that I might be at peace with my God. His stripes heal mine.

“All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth. He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand. He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities. Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.” - Isaiah 53:6-12

It was God's will to crush him, for him to bear our iniquities. He is the perfect, complete atoning sacrifice for our sins. By his suffering God is satisfied of the penalty of our sin; by his death he paid the penalty for the wages of our sin (our death). He bore the sins of many, and made intercession for us with God. By the suffering of one who should not have suffered, many are given mercy in place of deserving judgment. By Jesus' death on the cross, I find mercy from my God and my King when all I deserve is everlasting damnation. Thank you, my Lord.

Hallelujah! Glory alone to God for this thing He has wrought!Continue Reading >>

The most prominent international example of this is the disaster that has struck Obama's campaign for the Democratic Presidential nomination. It seems that the minister of Obama's church which he has attended for the past 20 years has said some rather uncharitable things about America in general, and specifically about those of a pale pigmentation. I won't bother repeating what has been said elsewhere, as you can find all the information you could ever possibly want about it on CNN or one of the other news websites. Such a thing is a disaster of course – it would be like Fred Phelps of “God Hates Fags” infamy endorsing McCain for the Presidency. Non-extreme-Homophobic supporters of McCain would go running for the hills, with McCain probably running right after them in the rush to get away. We can't assume that Obama holds the views of his minister, in fact given his consistent rhetoric I would suggest we can safely assume he does not hold those sorts of views. However, Obama is now stuck with the mere whiff of unelectability that comes with association with peddler's of unpopular rhetoric. How he behaves in distancing himself from these views in the next week or so may determine whether he wins the nomination and the November election in the USA. That's if it isn't already too late.

Here in New Zealand a rather more ambiguous situation has arisen. Sir Roger Douglas, the Finance Minister of the Fourth Labour Government that brought in many of the free-market reforms that have created the economic growth experienced here over the past decade, has announced he is now a candidate for the ACT Party. When NZ went to MMP in the mid-1990s, Douglas helped form the Right-wing Liberal ACT Party and served for some years as its President. He and current leader had a major falling out due to Hide's particular tendencies to “Perk-bust” rather than take an ideological approach to politicking. But Hide has reformed his ways (due no doubt in small part to ACT's collapse in electoral support) and Douglas is back – not just in the party, but as a candidate no less. This has two effects of course – it excites the soft-ACTites who have been with National since 2004 when they were pushed away with an ideological “Cultural Revolution” into possibly slipping back in behind them, and it causes discomfort and panic attacks for those on the left and the mortgage-belt. The grandstanding of ACT that Douglas would be put forward as a Cabinet member of a National-ACT government didn't exactly quell the horses either – the last thing many members of the public want is another round of Rogernomics (because they do not see the connection between the pain of the '80s and the gain of the '90s and '00s). The last thing National wants is to be associated with Douglas – that puts the whiff of unelectability upon them that may scare away the soft-National support base who may swing back to Labour. So this election year should be interesting – ACT is going to use Douglas as their poster-boy, and touting him as the perfect compliment to a National-led government. National want ACT's support so will be sitting in the chair next to them, but leaning as far away from Douglas as possible without being seen as rude.

Because it's not about what you know – it's about who you know.Continue Reading >>

‘Ohariu Valley Preservation Society is being established to fight the Mill Creek proposal. Society member Margaret Niven said the project had divided the community.’ - Source

So why am I writing this? I’m convinced that in order to be a better writer, I need to write more. While I have always had a good mind for constructing logical arguments, typically my writing has slightly let me down. Since I am now studying at postgraduate level, the written word takes a greater focus. So I need to be able to say more with better variety, better lucidity, and in my own style than I did previously. Undergraduate history and politics can be somewhat forgiving of writing deficits; commerce students get A’s in essays if they are able to string semi-lucid sentences together with more than one polysyllabic word in each. It’s not that I lack the desire to express myself. My brain constantly comes up with some reaction to something I have read or seen on the news, or plain thought out of thin air, which is potential verbiage. I just never seem to sit down and put pen to paper. Or if I do start it, finish it.

It is time for that to change. I need to write more to help myself write better. I also need to unleash some of the theological tension that has built up in my cerebral cortex over the past few years. Suffice to say that some will have recognised that I am not the man I was – God has been hammering away and humbling me in some key areas in my life, and that has reflected in my reversal on some doctrinal positions. I need to get that off my chest, and I will. But I need also to reflect more the other sides of my personality. I am more than just a conservative evangelical Christian. I have political opinions, and I should express them (so you have a greater idea of where I am coming from). I have hopes and fears, find things funny, and sometimes find my brain has ticked over some interesting revelation based on observation of things on the news (or television, or the internet). The more I express this, the more this site will better reflect who I actually am, rather than caricatures of me that could be assembled based on misunderstandings of what I say. Furthermore, the more I express myself, the more I am forced to explore the English language in the search of greater varieties of words, synonyms and turns of phrase to accurately describe what I am trying to say without falling into a pattern of repetition. If that means setting aside more time for writing and less time for reading, then so be it. If nothing else, it will do my bank balance some good (and cause a small downturn in Amazon’s profit margins, but that’s not my problem!). So much like my fitness regimen, my regimen of prayer and bible study, it is time to introduce a regimen of writing. I hope that the results are fruitful.Continue Reading >>

Now sure, some of the gap can be attributed to various technical explanations regarding minerals and such, but I wonder whether there is a simpler historical argument that may help explain it? As far as my reasoning carries me (and this is based purely on some historical information I've picked up in NZ history books and some anecdotal evidence) it seems that the simplest reason for understanding why Australians get paid more than Kiwis is because until 25 years ago our economy was far less diversified than theirs (and still may be, does anybody know?). Much of our employment seemed to revolve around primary export industries – farms, and the infrastructure to support it (rail, meatworks, farm service industries, etc). Plenty of this stuff doesn't require much of a qualification or portable skill base to work in it, but that didn't matter since employment laws were extremely strict and for a while things were still okay (if not as great as they were in the 1950s). Then the Lange government came to power, and removed a lot of the artificial supports that had been constructed to support an economy that couldn't be supported.

So what happens? Lots of unskilled people (low potential wage pulling ability) are left chasing fewer jobs (because of a recession and high inflation, and the structural upheaval as the economy begins to react to market signals and diversifies). Wage rates stagnate, or even drop. The opening up of the labour market to market signals in 1991 reinforces this trend. Eventually the economy turns the corner and starts growing again, but half the problem still remains – unskilled labour. Not having the skills to demand a higher pay rate, they are forced to accept lower wages than if they were skilled. Of course one would expect this to correct over time as people gained qualifications and experience, and new entrants into the labour market should be better prepared to compete in it. But this can only be ever part of the story – after all, it takes two to tango in the employment dance.

To be honest, the other reason I think that wages are lower here than in Australia is because we have some selfish bosses who want to treat their staff like their personal property rather than a human being. They're only thinking about Number 1, rather than about the wider impact that their business has on society. Of course, there are plenty who don't fit this mould, but I've heard some pretty impressive stories (like the guy who left his casual job because he was rostered on to work one day a fortnight, as his boss could pay him the minimum wage or some 14 year-old $7 an hour to do the same job). And it may be possible that some of this is a reaction to the way in which unions behaved prior to the Employment Contracts Act (and that some still do, unfortunately), and so is a bit of payback (which hardly excuses the behaviour). Why on earth would you want to pay your staff more? Well for a start, if they get more from their work they'll feel more loyalty. Pay isn't the only thing (I'd quit a highly paid job if I was not appreciated and treated poorly, and make sure the whole world knew why), but part of letting an employee know that you care for their well-being and value their contribution to your business is paying them properly. Perhaps a few of our business owners and managers need to learn to pay their staff a little more and treat them properly. It may mean a cut in profits, but in the long run it will be worth it.

It's possible that I have committed some sort of right-wing heresy by daring voice this, but to be honest I don't care. While the restructuring of the economy has done a world of good and there is still some way to go, one of the biggest downsides to it and the way our society has been progressing is that we have over-emphasised the individual over the family and society. We need to get that balance back, and that starts with a healthy dose of compassion for those who aren't quite as fortunate as we are. The best time to start is now.

Courses I am taking:

- HIST404 - A Topic in the History of the US (perhaps looking at Reconstruction or the New Deal in the South if I can focus on that)

- HIST 407 - Magic, Witchcraft, Religion in Early Modern Europe (I'd like to do something to do with some Reformation Era religious controversy for an essay, but we'll see)

- HIST 419 - A Topic in Historiography 1 (took a similar paper at undergrad level, hopefully this goes into more depth - at the least, it is treading familiar territory)

- HIST 421 - A Topic in European History 2 (on trade and commerce in the Atlantic - looking forward to some more economic style history)

I'm looking forward to the challenge. Hopefully the courses and the year lives up to my expectations.Continue Reading >>

Resolutions? None as such - I intend to carry on through 2008 what I started in 2007. Hopefully I lose the last 4kgs to my target weight (last year I dropped about 8-10% of my body weight by adopting a better diet and heading out for regular runs).

So how have I joined the 21st Century? Well, today I bustled on down to the Boxing Day sale bonanza (as much for the potential savings as the sight of the entire population descending on a small number of carparks) and picked up an iPod Classic 80 gig. Quite cool really, plays video and can store photos too, which was all the craze a generation or two back. Plus it cost me a similar amount to what my sister paid for a 30 gig years ago (ha!). So now I've got Amarok all set-up to sync with it, and I have shifted 125 CDs of listening pleasure onto it, plus some podcasts. Welcome to the 21st Century, Ashley.

A War Like No Other is, simply put, a thematically based history of the Peloponnesian War fought between the Greek city states of Sparta and Athens. For nigh on thirty years, these two military giants of their time fought an on-again, off-again war of invasion, rampage, devastation and destruction over Greece and Sicily. The outcome? Ultimately, Sparta won the war, but in doing so sealed its own doom. Continue Reading >>

Some people view the Old and New Testament as two sides of a coin, insofar as God in the Old Testament is seen as a stern, jealous disciplinarian while the New Testament paints a picture of a God of love and forgiveness. This view could not be more mistaken. One of many examples of this can be found in God's instructions to the Israelites to designate Cities of Refuge amongst the possessions of the Twelve Tribes.

Under the legal system imposed by God on the Israelites, the penalty for killing another person was that of death (as in 'eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth' style justice that is so haughtily dismissed today). Such is a just punishment as defined by the issuer of laws (though the killer and relatives may disagree). Yet even the stern, jealous disciplinarian that some love to paint saw fit to provide mercy when circumstances asked for it. As we read in the above passage, those who killed by accident and without prior malice were able to seek sanctuary in a City of Refuge to escape the just punishment that would no doubt be meted out by the relatives of the slain person. Continue Reading >>

Resurrection Day is set some ten years after the Cuban Missile Crisis, centred around the the character of Carl Landry. The difference between our history and the history of Resurrection Day is the outcome of the Cuban Missile Crisis. In our timeline, President Kennedy enforced a blockade, resisted pressure to attack Cuba when a U2 reconnaissance plane was shot down, and negotiated a withdrawal of the Soviet nuclear missiles from Cuba. In the timeline of Resurrection Day however, things go drastically wrong. An aggressive U.S. General takes matters into his own hands and retaliates for the downing of the craft, leading to an invasion, a nuclear exchange, and the deaths of millions of Americans as a result. Resurrection Day is set in the aftermath of this war, in which the surviving members of President Kennedy's administration are war criminals, and the U.S. is reduced to being a semi-despotic Second World state reliant on the goodwill of the U.K. while the European Powers reassume their dominance of the globe. Continue Reading >>