Fifty-five years have passed since God first drew me into a personal love relationship with Jesus that wonderfully changed the direction of my life and ministry. During those eventful nine months spanning 1970 – 1971 I sensed that, in spiritual terms, I was living the rest of my life in microcosm. Now, looking back over more than five decades, I can truly say that’s the way it has been … and continues to be!
Twelve years later, I wrote about it in the first edition of this book. That was a long time ago, and it’s time for an updated second edition*. Which also gives me this opportunity to say from my own long experience that, however wonderful it is to fall in love with Jesus, living in love with Him day-by-day is what leads to a love relationship that grows ever richer … and goes wonderfully deeper.
I could never have imagined that what God began to do in me and with me through those events and experiences would lead to where I am now. But I did not need to, because God knew and all He needed – all He has ever needed – was my responsiveness, willingness and obedience.
Whether you are reading the message of this book for the first time, or the fifty-first, may this wonderful ever-deepening love relationship with Jesus be your constant experience, as it is mine!
The message of this small book is for those who desire an intimate relationship with God above everything else. It is not for those seeking to get the most out of God for the least price. Neither is it for the self-satisfied or self-indulgent.
God is looking for people who will gladly give all for the privilege of pleasing Him. He seeks those who want a heart-to-heart relationship with Him rather than personal benefits. They are the ones whose eyes He opens, leading them into the beautiful discovery of the ultimate attainment.
It took God almost twelve years, from the day I first came to know Him, to make a lover of me. For all that time I wanted so much to please Him … but as a servant.
My conversion at the age of seventeen was a very real, life-changing experience. I was baptised in the Holy Spirit a few months later and soon found myself being moved into leadership and ministry. At eighteen I preached my first sermon in the Anglican church I was attending.
With sayings such as “You’re saved to serve!” and “Jesus died for you … what have you done for Him?” ringing in my ears, I became increasingly involved in Christian work. This led me to enter Bible College and eventually into full-time ministry at the age of twenty-six.
I wanted to lead people to Jesus. I wanted to do God’s work, and I was very sincere. More than that, I knew that God had called me. He blessed and honoured much of what I did. Under His direction I trod a path of faith, obedience and fruitfulness. My satisfaction and sense of fulfilment grew, and I thought I had found the way to please God.
Had God not intervened when He did, dramatically redirecting me, I would have simply continued serving Him in the only way I knew. But He did intervene and His redirection came in the form of a clear, yet entirely unexpected, direction to go to Moscow for Him. I had never before experienced anything like that. It was exciting, overwhelming … and frightening.
Setting out from Australia in September 1970, I began a journey which moved me into a dependence on God greater than I had ever known. I needed His guidance and His provision, not in a general sense, but literally day-to-day. I had no idea of the route I would follow nor of the time the journey would take. Neither did I know that, before ever reaching Russia, I would enter into a love relationship with Jesus that would transform my life and ministry from then on.1
The message contained in this book was first given to me by God in December 1970, while I was travelling across Canada on my way to Russia. It was the culmination of a process which had been taking place over several weeks, during which God was transforming me from a servant to a lover. As I moved from place to place, preaching in various churches, that transformation began to be reflected in my ministry.
One Saturday night, as I was praying about what I should preach in a particular church the next morning, God led me to the first eight verses of John chapter 12. From those verses He not only gave me my message for that Sunday, but also the message that was to become the overriding theme of my life from then on.
Of all my teaching and preaching in many places over the years, this is the message I have shared far more than any other. I have seen its transforming effect, not only in my own life and ministry, but also in the lives of individuals and churches wherever it has been received and responded to.
Sadly, not all of God’s servants want to make the transition to being His lovers – nevertheless both the call and the opportunity are there for everyone.
What really is the significance of being a Christian? There are, of course, the nominal church attenders who call themselves Christians but who have no real personal experience or relationship with Jesus. Their situation is clear. They need to come to Him, to personally put their trust in Him and be born again. But what about the true believers – those who have responded to Jesus and who know they have been born again?
Whether you call it conversion, or use some other term, the experience of receiving Jesus into your life, of being born again by God’s Spirit, is a very real one. It holds the potential of a transformed life here and an even better one in the life to come.
After my own conversion, I joined a church and got to know other Christians. It was a bit like being ushered into the membership of an exclusive club. I soon gained the impression that so long as someone was a Christian they were ‘alright’. Non-Christians were the outsiders. We, the born-again believers, were the insiders. That ‘Christian’ label made all the difference. A doctor was okay so long as he was a ‘Christian doctor’. The same applied to people like school teachers, lawyers … in fact anyone else you might want to trust or rely on.
After a while, though, that simple, rather starry-eyed idealism did not stand up in the cold light of reality. Christians they may have been, but that proved to be no guarantee that they were living up to the label!
To this day I still hear people applying that same naive logic. They become excited at the news that some prominent business leader, celebrity or politician is a ‘committed Christian’ – the assumption being that such people are ‘safe’. To some extent that may well be true. However the new life we receive in Jesus is a free gift, and being a Christian is no guarantee that a person is living like one! The significance of being a Christian is not in whether a person is born again or wears the right label.
Looking at John 12:1-8 we see that the group who gathered around Jesus that day in Bethany were all followers of His. We could say they wore the ‘Jesus’ label.
There was Lazarus, Jesus’ friend, whom He had not long before raised from the dead, as well as Lazarus’ two sisters, Martha and Mary. Their home was obviously a place where Jesus felt welcome and cared for. It was the place where He chose to stop before facing all that awaited Him in Jerusalem – culminating in His crucifixion.
Had you walked in on that dinner party at Bethany you would have seen Jesus surrounded by those who claimed to be His true followers. Yet some of them were not all they claimed to be. In fact, when it comes to relating to Jesus in a way which satisfies Him, only one of them did so.
“So they made Him a supper there; and Martha was serving”. She was good at that. During an earlier incident when Jesus was visiting the same house (Luke 10:38-42) Martha made Him welcome, yet did not really take the time to appreciate and enjoy her guest. Why? Because Martha’s way was to fuss about, making elaborate preparations, doing everything impeccably.
Her sister Mary, on the other hand, was completely taken up with all that Jesus had to share. Sitting at His feet she drank in His every word. The significance of this quite escaped Martha who was much too busy doing all the ‘right’ things.
Worse still, Martha’s irritation increased as time went on. Despite all she still had to do, her sister did not so much as lift a finger to help – so engrossed was she in everything Jesus was saying. Finally Martha’s frustration rose to the point where she snapped at Jesus: “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me to do all the serving alone? Then tell her to help me!”
From Martha’s viewpoint it was not only Mary but also Jesus who was at fault. In her eyes both He and Mary were uncaring and insensitive. In their apparent disregard for her and her need of help, they clearly had their priorities wrong. Surely it should have been obvious to them that they had left her to do all the work. This was no time to sit around and talk. Martha had figured out her priorities, and she was going to lavish her hospitality on Jesus in a big way whether He liked it or not!
Jesus was unmoved. He did not succumb to Martha’s outburst, though He must have been saddened by what it revealed about her. “Martha, Martha,” He said, “you are worried and bothered about so many things; but only one thing is necessary, for Mary has chosen the good part, which shall not be taken away from her.” Martha’s frantic preparations, her fastidious fussing, were utterly lost on Jesus. He did not want to be doted on like a V.I.P. His heart was overflowing with God’s love and God’s life and He wanted to share it. Mary sensed this and gladly responded to Him.
Martha, on the other hand, was acutely aware of all that had to be done, to the extent of being blatantly unaware of the God-given privilege which was hers – the privilege of closeness with Jesus.
There are Christians who speak of a ‘Martha ministry’ when referring to those aspects of church life which require someone who can be down-to-earth and practical. There is no such thing. Martha did not have a ministry, she had a problem! She was caught up in the ‘service syndrome’ which is so common among Christians and encouraged in many churches. But it’s wrong.
Not that a great deal of the service being rendered by willing, hard-working individuals is wrong or unnecessary of itself, but if those who perform it share Martha’s approach, then their motivation is wrong. Martha valued her service, rather than the One she served, because, in her eyes, what she did made her somebody. It gave her an identity, a purpose and a sense of achievement. Of course there was a competitive aspect too because, in striving to excel, she also sought to outdo the people around her. Martha’s achievements gave her something by which she could conveniently measure herself against others… and feel superior!
No doubt she would have pointed to the way she put herself out to serve Jesus as proof of how much she valued Him. Many today would make the same claim. Yet Martha was not motivated by a true appreciation of Jesus and who He was. His visit merely presented her with an opportunity to showcase her gifts and abilities.
Which is precisely the case with many who claim to serve God, whether in the most menial or mundane of tasks (dutifully performed ‘in the name of the Lord’) or in the forefront of Christian ministry. Those motivated by the service syndrome present us not with shining examples, but with an ugly parody of the real thing. Such wrong motivation feeds egos and provides a false sense of achievement and importance. Worst of all it deprives God of what He longs for.
On that day in Bethany, Jesus had stopped by on His way to Jerusalem and His cross of execution. All He wanted was to be with His friends. He longed for their expressions of love toward Him to mirror the same love He had already freely given them. Yet the only way Martha chose to meet His need was by serving!
While Martha busied herself with serving, Lazarus her brother reclined at the table with Jesus.
In those times and in that kind of setting, with the food laid out at floor-level, those who ate would literally recline on one elbow. As in the following chapter where John rested his head on Jesus’ chest at the Last Supper, reclining at the table afforded Lazarus a similar opportunity to express his close friendship with Jesus.
There was a bond of affection between Jesus and Lazarus, typified by the message Martha and Mary had earlier sent Jesus at the time of Lazarus’ fatal illness: “He whom you love is sick”. Though Lazarus died after that, Jesus raised him from the dead. Now, with Jesus visiting him once more, Lazarus simply wanted to be there at the table, enjoying the presence of his friend and expressing his affection for Him.
As we shall see, even such a demonstration of friendship fell short of the kind of expression which Jesus longed for. But, at least, it was far closer to the mark than Martha’s. She could only value Jesus on the basis of self-gratifying service, whereas Lazarus valued Him for who He was.
Certainly Lazarus had greatly benefited from his relationship with Jesus (being raised from the dead is no small thing!), but that had only served to strengthen the bond which already existed between them and to increase the regard in which Lazarus held Jesus.
So Lazarus was content to do nothing more than just be there with his friend, enjoying and appreciating Him.
Friendship is not so much what we do for one another, as the deep satisfaction and enjoyment of simply being together. This is often lacking in the Church, when people get so caught up in performance and service that they fail to forge relationships in which they can simply relax and enjoy their belonging and togetherness.
True friendship means mutual enjoyment of one another. If there is no such enjoyment in a relationship there is no life in it …and no lasting, God-glorifying fruit can come out of it.
So we can see that, while Martha did no more than serve Jesus, Lazarus truly valued Him as his friend. Yet there was still a limit. His ‘love’ for Jesus was neither total nor unconditional. He valued Jesus greatly, relished every opportunity to be with Him and extended warm hospitality to Him and His disciples.
But love is a verb. Love takes the initiative. Love looks for ways to express itself to its beloved and to pay a price for putting its beloved first. Lazarus cherished Jesus as his friend … but he did not truly love Him.
Mary, though, related to Jesus in a way which far surpassed Lazarus’ warm friendship. Taking a pint of very expensive spikenard ointment, she knelt down and poured it all over Jesus’ feet. Then, stooping low she proceeded to wipe His feet with her hair.
It is not difficult to imagine how this act of pouring costly ointment over her guest’s feet – no matter how distinguished he was – would have been seen as an act of gross extravagance. Certainly anyone in those days who wished to bestow honour on a guest entering their home would anoint him. But it would be poured on his head, not his feet – and rarely, if ever, would it be something as extravagantly expensive as the spikenard used by Mary. If the host wished to attend to his guest’s feet it would be along the lines of washing them with water (as Jesus did to His disciples at the Last Supper) – an act of hospitality with the practical function of also washing the dust off sandal-clad feet.
To pour costly perfume over Jesus’ head would have been extravagant enough, but to pour it over his dusty feet, when water drawn from the well at no cost would have done a better cleansing job anyway, made absolutely no sense at all! Then, as if that was not bad enough, Mary indulged in the humiliating act of using her hair for a foot towel!
What was the point of it all? She certainly wasn’t extending normal hospitality – cheap ointment on the head would have done nicely for that. Neither was she being responsible with her resources – splashing expensive perfume around makes no financial sense! She was not even being practical – a basin of water would have been a better foot-washing medium. Yet, neither was she indulgently drawing attention to herself – a Martha-like approach would have served better for that.
In seeking to understand what Mary did, we inevitably try to rationalise it. But hers was not a rational response, it was a love response. She followed her heart, not her head. There was nothing calculated about the way she responded to Jesus. She simply made Him the object of her love and then sought a way to express that love. In her case that expression took the form of costly perfume poured over His feet to such a lavish extent that “the house was filled with the fragrance of the ointment”.
Martha’s serving was eminently respectable. Lazarus’ warm friendship was commendable. But Mary’s demonstration was seen as wasteful, even offensive (as we shall see). She did everything she could to be lavish and self-giving toward Jesus …because she loved Him! The very totality of her response is an example of the fact that true love cannot draw the line.
On the other hand, lesser motivations such as duty, gratitude, thankfulness and even obligation, all have definite limitations. They go so far but no further.
There is no greater written revelation of God than that contained in the simple words: “God is love”. Probably the best-known Bible verse, John 3:16, speaks of that very revelation and its inevitable outworking: “…God so loved…that He gave…”. He could not have done otherwise, for love is giving. If there is no giving there is no love.
It follows then that because God is love, He must be the very epitome of giving. And such giving – such love – is freely expressed without limit and without restraint, as can be clearly seen in the way God gave His Son Jesus. He was not obliged or compelled to do so. God gave Jesus because His love for us has no limits. The only way He could express it was by freely and completely giving the One most precious to Him.
In lavishly displaying her love for Jesus, Mary also gave true love a fitting expression. What less could she do? When you truly love someone, is it possible to demonstrate the reality of your love without giving? Not only will you give, but neither practicality nor common sense will have any bearing on how and what you give. Godly love entails all that you are and all that you have. If you really want to please Him there is no alternative.
Jesus was once asked which of God’s commandments was the foremost. Without hesitation He answered: “The foremost is, ‘Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength’.” (Mark 12:29 & 30). It could not be clearer. Yet the evidence around us indicates that, of all the things so many Christians seek to concentrate on and excel in, obedience to the greatest of all God’s commandments is so rarely at the top of their list. It is imperative that this deficiency be corrected. There is no greater priority for God’s Church.
There is, of course, a certain threat in making a love commitment to God: the threat of no longer having the freedom to regulate the extent of your response to Him. The thought of being continually and totally responsive to God can be quite frightening!
For many, it is far more appealing to think in terms of a Christian’s duty or obligation. Like spending one hour a day with God (leaving you twenty-three for yourself), giving Him a tenth of your income (leaving nine-tenths for you) and setting aside Sunday (leaving you the other six days of the week). These are much more attractive alternatives! After all, once you have established that these are God’s requirements, you can always give yourself a pat on the back whenever you ‘go the extra mile’ by exceeding them a little … or even a lot. Then you can say to yourself, “What a good person I am!” as you look down on those who did not exceed them by as much as you did. At the same time there is the comforting thought that you are still the one in control. It’s rather like having your cake and eating it too. But it certainly isn’t love.
Love is a deliberate act of will, in which you choose to give your all to the object of your love. Because love is a matter of choice, it does not depend on mere feelings or emotions. Which is why God commands us to love Him, rather than saying, “love me if and when you feel in love with me”.
At some point Mary deliberately chose to make Jesus the special object of her love. Once she made that choice she began to seek out opportunities to express her love. When she seized the occasion to lavish that ointment on Jesus’ feet she was simply expressing the choice she had already made.
To not love Jesus as Mary did, is to not love Him in the way He has commanded. Fail to do this and you neglect to do the one thing which counts above all else. Whatever you may do to substitute for that neglect – however great, however noble – can in no way make up for your lack of love for Jesus.
The point is clear. To truly please God you must make love your aim – settling for nothing less.
You must apply yourself unfailingly to this one thing: to loving the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength. Nothing is greater than this. Attain this and you attain all. Only by this can we come into the same oneness with God which Jesus possessed, and which He prayed for us to have. When that has taken place, all else that is right, true and necessary will follow.
It is precisely by such a love relationship between God and His people that He will be glorified. This is the fulfilment of the purpose for which Jesus came.
Sadly, our story is not yet finished, for there was one other who played a significant part in it – the disciple Judas.
Though his name is usually associated with avarice and betrayal we must not forget that Judas was one of Jesus’ disciples. He was not an outsider among those gathered at Bethany that day. He was known by all as one of those chosen by Jesus to follow Him. In a present-day setting he would be a key person in a church or a ministry team.
Not everyone condemns Judas. Some feel sorry for him. They see him as a “fall guy” set up by God as the person fated to do the dirty work so that Jesus would go to the cross. But God doesn’t work like that.
Certainly Jesus needed to die. Certainly it was Judas who betrayed Him. Yet it was not because he was locked into that role by fate, but because of the choices he made. When he decided to follow Jesus it was because he saw something in it for himself. Judas lived for himself and he saw in Jesus’ mission the promise of personal gain.
When, after a while, Judas felt that things were not going in the direction he had hoped for, he became disillusioned. Once that happened he was on the market – available to the highest bidder.
And it only took thirty pieces of silver to buy him. Judas was a man who could be bought, and a handful of silver looked better to him than anything Jesus was offering.
Some say that Judas’ reaction to Mary’s act typifies that of the non-Christian world. Yet, his position as one of Jesus’ disciples makes it clear that this is not so. Unfortunately, Judas typifies a certain kind of Christian. Worse than that, he typifies a certain kind of ‘insider’ Christian.
Consider his reaction to Mary’s extravagance. Feigning horror at such waste when so many poor people could have been helped, Judas placed no value whatsoever on Mary’s demonstration of love. How could he? He lived only for himself. He lived not to give but to get. To love Jesus as Mary did held no attraction for him at all. His only interest in Jesus was to use Him for self-gain. It was inevitable, then, that Judas should feel threatened by the way in which Mary gave herself to Jesus in that display of extravagant love.
Like so many of his kind, Judas’ reaction was presented in the guise of a respectable, even noble, objection: “How could you waste all that money! Don’t you care about the poor?” Protecting himself, as he always did, there was no way Judas could betray his real motives – so, instead, he cast aspersions on innocent Mary.
In the same way many sincere, eager Christians have begun to enter into a love relationship with Jesus only to be condemned by others for their seemingly foolish, extravagant and irrational demonstrations of love! And such condemnation often comes from so-called older and wiser Christians – often in positions of ministry or leadership.
Like Judas, such people usually manage to present sound reasons for their objections. After all, they can hardly afford to admit that someone else’s expression of love for Jesus shows up their own lack! So they object in a noble and righteous way – protesting that the money should have been used constructively to help the needy, or the time should have been diligently applied to witnessing, or the praying should have been focused on ‘the lost’ of this world.
Whatever the resources being ‘wasted’ on expressions of love to Jesus, the Judases in the Church will always be able to come up with a good-sounding objection to such thoughtless extravagance!
Protest though he did, Judas cared nothing for the poor … but he certainly cared about Judas! As he watched that costly ointment gushing over the feet of Jesus he was counting money – his money. Being trusted by Jesus to be His treasurer, Judas repaid Him by stealing. He was an outright thief who pilfered from the money bag, embezzling the funds given to Jesus and His disciples. Had he been able to get his hands on the three hundred denarii for which the spikenard ointment could have been sold, he would have made sure some of it found its way into his pocket. Seeing that go down the drain must have broken his heart!
Much modern evangelism has resulted in many Judases being attracted to the Church. The ‘come and get’ rather than ‘come and give’ approach has meant that lust, rather than love, has been encouraged, as egos, ambitions and self-indulgent attitudes have been fed. Not only to get people into the Church but also to keep them there.
The problem is, such people have no desire to love Jesus. Like Judas, they are in it for what they can get out of it. Make them a better offer, and they will inevitably take it.
Their only loyalty is to themselves. Their only commitment is to their self-gratification. God, Jesus and the Church exist for their benefit … or else. Though they know how to look good and sound right, at heart they are no better than Judas. They are thieves and betrayers.
Judas’ condemnation of Mary brought Jesus immediately to her defence. He knew, better than she did, the significance of her expression of love. “Let her alone,” He demanded, “in order that she may keep it for the day of my burial!”
In six days Jesus would be crucified. Though others of His followers would not really begin to value Him for who He was until then, Mary had already done so. While others would perhaps be moved to say on that day, “I love Him for dying for me,” she loved Him, not for what he was yet to do for her, but for who He was to her. Her expression of love before His burial had a significance beyond anything that would be expressed when that day came.
Having endorsed Mary’s act, Jesus went on to challenge Judas’ professed scale of values. His noble pretext for objecting was that the perfume should have been sold and the proceeds given to the poor. His pretext was sound – even if his motives were not. Jesus did not refute that. Certainly the poor were in need, but the whole situation had to be seen in the light of Divine reality.
Whether or not the poor could have been helped was, simply, not the point. In assessing the value of the perfume, Mary’s criterion was not, ‘Where will this do the most good?’ but rather, ‘Who is most worthy of all I have to give?’ She felt no guilt in lavishing her costly gift on the one she loved, yet Judas tried to impose guilt on her. He did not care for the poor at all and for him to champion their cause was a farce.
Neither Jesus nor Mary felt guilt over the “wasted” spikenard and the empty mouths which could otherwise have been filled. In Mary’s eyes, Jesus’ worthiness to be lavished upon with her love was far greater than the greatest human need. A sentiment which Jesus strongly endorsed and defended. If only today’s Christians would see things that way!
As a young evangelically-orientated Christian in years gone by, I believed that saving souls was the most important thing one could do for God. Surely the most godly of acts was to rescue a sinner from a “Christless Eternity”.
No one taught me to love Jesus – but they certainly taught me to lead people to Him. Their need to be saved, I well understood. His worthiness to be loved, I did not. I appreciated what He had done to make salvation possible, but I had not learned to appreciate Him for His own sake.
Yet, even as I strove to please God by serving Him in evangelism, I knew only too well that I lacked that quality they called ‘compassion for souls’. Not that I didn’t care about them. I cared a lot. But I knew I didn’t love them as Jesus did. He cared enough to die for them. I could preach that – but I could not really relate to it.
In laying down which of God’s commandments was the foremost, Jesus did not stop after the first. Instead He went on to say, “The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” He tied those two commandments together, and in so doing made it clear that we are indeed to care about other people. Specifically, we are to love them.
It’s not a matter of loving Jesus to the exclusion of others. Rather, it is a matter of getting the order of things right. It is simply not possible for you to truly love the people Jesus loves until you first love the One who truly loves them! If you do not obey the first commandment you will in no way succeed in obeying the second.
Despite Judas’ accusations, Mary was not devaluing the poor by giving Jesus the priority of her love. She was merely putting first things first by exalting the One who alone is the hope of all the world – including the world’s poor.
We, as God’s people, have much to offer humankind. But we cannot give them what they really need unless we first love them as God does. To do this we must first be lovers of Jesus. Whether in humanitarian works or in spiritual ministry, we misrepresent Jesus unless we love people as a result of first loving Him.
There is, of course, a great deal of attraction in helping people. It’s nice to be known as a caring, good-hearted person. It certainly helps your reputation and generally wins you esteem and support from both those in the Church and the community at large. On the other hand, what gain is there in being known as a lover of Jesus? It might even get you labelled as a fanatic! Yet there is no other way for those who want to please God.
If you are unwilling to pour out all that you are and all that you have on Jesus – if you will not give yourself to Him in the abandonment of love – you will neither please Him nor reveal Him to this needy world.
Like it or not that’s the way it is. Fail to be a lover of Jesus and you fail completely. A strong statement? Not nearly as strong as the way the apostle Paul put it. He uncompromisingly stated: “If anyone does not love the Lord, let him be accursed.” (1 Corinthians 16:22).
Jesus said that the entire Law and the Prophets depend on those two Great Commandments. Everything God has said, done, revealed and laid down in His relationship with humankind ultimately stands or falls by this one thing: whether or not we obey His commands to love.
Jesus is the Great Bridegroom preparing for the day when He is united with His Bride, His Beloved, the Church – us. He “loved the Church and gave Himself up for her” to make it all possible.
To respond to Jesus, to the desire of His heart, to love Him as He loves us – with all that we have and all that we are – surely this is the ULTIMATE ATTAINMENT.
Tony Kostas was born in Melbourne, Australia in 1941, where at the age of seventeen, he committed his life to Jesus at a Billy Graham Crusade. In 1967 he founded the Melbourne Outreach Crusade, a non-denominational evangelistic outreach. This later grew into Outreach International, which is now a worldwide body of believers, who share a God-given calling and are committed to live in love with Him and with one another.
Tony’s life is a true expression of all that God has revealed to him throughout the years, in its purity and focus on loving God. His passion is for God to have the desire of His heart: a people who truly represent Him because they are His and His alone.