Science Plus Faith - A Potential Mix

In 2011 my wife Alex and I spent a few hours strolling through the ruins of the Asklepeion, the remains of an ancient hospital at Kos, one of the Greek islands of the Dodecanese. The header photo on this page was taken at the Asklepeion, with Alex posing among six of the seven original Roman columns which once supported the roof of the Temple of Apollo. These columns were relatively recent, about AD 200, by comparison to the site on which they once stood, and standing once again after active restoration. Because dating back centuries BC, this hospital was the home of one of history's greatest doctors of all time - Hippocrates (c.460-370 BC.)

Bust of Hippocrates

Hippocrates has always been considered the father of medicine. One of his greatest achievements was to separate science facts from the pagan pantheon of bickering gods whose thoughts and actions determined the decisions made by men. Instead, what he did was observe the erratic behaviour of individuals and associate these behaviours with specific diseases. This idea eventually allowed him to draw up a theory that each human has four body fluids - blood, yellow bile, black bile, and phlegm. For good health, each of these fluids must be in perfect balance, according to Hippocrates. But generally, they are not in perfect balance but rather, each person has one, maybe two, dominating fluids which not only bring certain types of physical diseases, but also determine the person's behaviour, particularly in relating to others around him.

Therefore, this theory became known as the Four Humours, or Temperaments, and until recently it was used as a base tool for Psychology. This is the explanation on say; the sight of a partially filled glass. Two of the four humours would say,
"The glass is half full, let's make use of the resource we have." (Optimism.)
While the other two would lament,
"Oh dear, the glass is half empty, what will happen now?" (Pessimism.)

These are the two viewpoints over a half-filled (or empty) glass which psychologists divide personality into just two - extrovert and introvert. But Hippocrates saw that both these characteristics were divided into two sub-divisions, these creating four temperament types. One type of extrovert was people-centred. Hippocrates believed that it was warm blood which made this particular individual talkative, impulsive, very friendly and having a warm heart towards others. Thus this type of person was labelled Sanguine - meaning blood. The other type of extrovert was task oriented. He had good leadership capabilities, less talkative than the first, but very productive - but also had a quick temper and was prone to anger. Hippocrates believed that yellow bile predominated, and referred to him as Choleric - meaning anger-prone. Among the introverts, one was prone to be sad or moody most of the time, but also enjoyed the fine arts and music, and tended to be a critical perfectionist. The ancient doctor believed that black bile ruled the roost in this chap, and labelled him Melancholia - meaning prone to sadness. Finally the fourth type was observed as slow, unmotivated, always tired, and spent much of his time at rest. As such he was referred to as Phlegmatic - meaning that phlegm dominated in this person.

The Four Humours. Clockwise from upper left: Phlegmatic, Choleric, Melancholia and Sanguine.

Hippocrates referred to the fluid imbalance as the cause of various diseases, and his remedy to his patients was to rest and allow the body fluids to re-balance themselves in the effort to recover. He was one of the first to also prescribe herbal drugs to hasten the re-balance. At the Asklepeion, we were able to see the site of patient wards were the sick rested to aid recovery, as well as a counselling room where diagnoses were made.  The only feature which were absent were the operating theatres, mainly due to the culture of the day which forbade dissecting of the body to observe the human anatomy.

However, patients who had terminal illness were allowed to make peace with the god Asklepios, the son of Apollos and considered in ancient Greek folklore as the god of health and medicine. His temple was located on the upper of the three levels. Very much like the chapels found in modern hospitals.

The Asklepeion in Kos

Hippocrates was a brilliant analyst of his day, but modern science had disproved his theory of the four body fluids. However, according to Dr. S. I. McMillen in his book, None of these Diseases, (1964, final reprint 1980) this 20th Century medical doctor lists more than ninety diseases, illnesses and other infirmities brought about by excess stress and the constant over-production of adrenaline fed into the bloodstream. Normally, adrenaline is a hormone which is rapidly pumped into the bloodstream as a result of fright, or imminent danger, allowing the person for rapid action, fight or take flight. However, on the minus side, Dr. McMillen sites anger, fear and worry as the three main causes which activates the two adrenal glands, located on each kidney.  Since this is mainly an emotional issue affecting one's reaction towards an opinion, another person, group of people or a set of circumstances, its debilitating effect on one's health seems to bring a correlation between the research of Dr. McMillen and that of Hippocrates, namely that body fluids determine both behaviour and health. However, for Hippocrates to carry out his research, the major move he had to make was the departure of science from the superstitious beliefs of his day.

At present, we see science as a great benefit to our lives, especially in the area of medicine. But as I stated in my last two blogs, some disciplines of science had taken us away from faith in God and the truthfulness of the Bible. Darwinism is such one discipline. No other branch of science had enticed so many from belief and faith in God, challenging the truthfulness of the Bible. And yet, as a part in preparation of this article, I had checked some statistics. To tell the truth, I was somewhat surprised in what I have found, because according to The Guardian newspaper, printed Sunday 1st February, 2009 - the headline read:
Half of Britons do not believe in Evolution.
This headline came out close to the date of Charles Darwin's 200th birthday and at the time such discussion were at its peak. With 2,060 adults questioned, the result of the survey was:
25% believe that Evolution to be definitely true.
25% believe that Evolution to be probably true.
22% believe in creation by intelligent design, with 10% believing in the Young Earth creationism.
The remaining 28% were not sure.

In response to the survey, Professor James Williams of Sussex University commented:
Creationists ask if people believe in evolution. Evolution is a theory and a fact. You accept it because of the evidence. What the creationists have done is put a cloak of pseudo-science to wrap up their religious beliefs.  Evolution is very badly taught in schools so the results of the survey don't surprise me. On the other hand, creationism has traditionally been an issue in North America and there is a big problem in Australia and Turkey. It matters if people don't understand how science works.

Agreeing with Professor Williams, an anonymous commentator added:
Well, what a seriously depressing article! I knew that the Brits were thick, but I didn't realise we were that thick...

Maybe so, but there is a strong correlation between the UK and the United States, where the latest Gallup Poll showed that up to 46% of all Americans believe in Creationism, leaving 32% believing in Theistic Evolution and the remaining 15% believing in Evolution without divine intervention. With this kind of survey result, little wonder that neuroscientist Sam Harris, in his book, Letter to a Christian Nation, (2006) the author lamented:
Indeed, I am painfully aware that my country appears, as at no other time in her history, like a lumbering, bellicose, dim-witted giant.

In writing this blog, it becomes apparent that those who protest against creationism in favour of evolution are mainly post-graduates. This is endorsed by the same Gallup Poll that amongst post-graduates, only 25% believe in creationism, compared with 46% of the rest of the population. In turn, 29% believe in evolution without divine intercession to the 15% by the general population.

This is the hostility of those holding on to science in opposition to faith. But by looking, as an example, to microbiology, it becomes apparent that it is mathematically impossible for the cell to have evolved in the Darwinian sense, a fact that evolutionists simply don't admit, although those who research genetics and such allied studies are fully aware of the impossibility for the cell to have evolved without any form of divine intervention. To read the full details of this, go to one of my blogs,
A Small Block To The Reality Of Evolution, published 26th February, 2012.

But to read how the vastly complex mechanism of the cell works to produce the intricate protein chain needed to sustain life makes fascinating reading. And this knowledge, when mixed with faith in the God who designed it, brings out my awe and admiration to the Creator of life. Science, mixed with faith in a Creator, is a wonderful blessing. Not only does science as a whole makes daily living  less harsh but brings a lot of personal comfort, it is worthwhile noting that the most complex and the most intricate device ever created is the human brain. God has given us brains to learn all about the ins and outs of his creation, and we call that science.

Faith asks why the world works in a certain way. Science asks how. And both complement each other.

Judging People?

In last week's blog post, I wrote about an incident which took place during our holiday in Malta. I testified about the meeting of two guys at the pub across our hotel who, after confessing our church allegiance and our faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour, admitted to us with some hesitation that they were Freemasons. I then wrote of my reluctance to judge their group or their attachment to them, with the preference to bring their concentration on to Jesus himself. In other words, to leave the judging to the Holy Spirit.

One reader who read my article wrote to me on Facebook that I should have judged their behaviour and their allegiance to Freemasonry.  His precise words were:
We are not called to judge people however we are commanded to judge their behaviour and to confront them with their sin.

I was somewhat stunned by that statement, but in another way I shouldn't have been. I have seen this sort of thing before. It was the central belief among the elders of a church in Sacramento, California - the Calvary Community Church. The only difference was that the elders in California embraced Eternal Security of the Believer. The guy who replied on Facebook has an Arminian view that one must remain faithful to stay saved. So I need to ask myself: Did I perform my duties rightly? Did I let these two in the Maltese bar slide towards Hell by my negligence to judge? Furthermore, should I bear the guilt? Here we need to go to the Bible to get some answers.

There seem to be a case of a strong conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit found in the second chapter of Acts. Here we have the apostle Peter preaching what could be called the first Christian sermon. His sermon was centred on Jesus being the Christ as the fulfilment of Old Testament prophecy. After quoting the writings of Joel and the Psalms of David, the narrator tells us that the listeners were "cut to the heart" and asked what needed to be done. Along with "many other words" Peter exhorted them to repent and be baptised. We are not told what these "many other words" were, but most likely they were explaining how the Crucifixion of Christ had fulfilled and made obsolete every Temple ordinance. So what did these Jews do? Examine how they had failed to obey the ten commandments? Rather, was the sin that had cut into their hearts the realisation that they were responsible for the death of their Messiah by crucifying him? As a result, they were to believe that the Jesus they had crucified is the risen Christ.

This seem to fall in line with the rest of the Bible. Jesus himself on many occasions, mostly in the Gospel of John, declared to the crowds that unless they believe that he is who he says he is, they shall perish. This is the essence of repentance. To believe in Jesus as the risen Christ. Paul, in his letter to the Romans, wrote that all who believe in his heart that Jesus has risen from the dead and confess him as Lord, he will be saved. And Paul seem to indicate that this is the universal appeal to all mankind - to believe in Jesus as the risen Messiah to be saved.

But what about the conviction of sin our friend on Facebook had brought up, backed by the elders of the Calvary Community Church? Is it necessary to be convicted of sin to bring true repentance? Could be this being the reason why the Gospel of Matthew contains the Sermon on the Mount? And this sermon specifically to bring out the full meaning of the Law and to show the true depth of sin? And then demonstrate himself as the solution to the problem as narrated in John's Gospel. Certainly, these ideas all seem to fit together.

Alongside this, the church in California brings out the notion of true and false conversion, as defined in Matthew 13:1-23. In one of my blogs, 300 Young People Saved - Yippee, Er, Really? published August 29th, 2011, I brought up the Parable of the Sower, and wrote that in the case of the pathway, where the seeds just lay there until eaten by the birds - depicts the unbeliever who forgets the Word of God, represented by the seed. By contrast, the good soil is the believer who receives the Word and in due time produces a crop of fruit. But the two in between - the rocky ground and the growth of weeds depict "false conversion" when the hearer believes for a while then falls away without producing lasting fruit.

At the time I wrote my blog, I actually felt that the elders at Calvary Community Church were right and the two "in between" depict false conversion. But after reading many blogs here on this site, as well as more Bible study, I now accept that among the rocky ground and those producing weeds, there is a chance that true converts exist among them. The reason why I feel this way is to compare Scripture with Scripture. In the parable of the Sower, only those representing the pathway remained lost in their sins. Of both the rocky ground and those producing weeds, these people believed the word, and accepting it with joy. Jesus himself said that whoever believes in him, receives eternal life and he passes from death into life. And those who remain condemned remain in that way because he has not believed in the Son of God. As with the pathway, the word was rejected and forgotten.

Here again, the aforementioned church, along with our Facebook friend, could argue that without the conviction of sin, the resulting conversion could not be true. They would argue that in many altar calls, one would "receive Christ" in a high state of emotion without realising the seriousness of their sin which would call for the need of a Saviour. Unfortunately, they see many such calls responded to without a rebirth, maybe a means to satisfy the desire of a parent or friend, or for a deep feeling of sentimentality brought on by a moving song or testimony. However, the book of Acts records a number of conversions, and it may help to look at these.

In Acts 2 we have already seen that the three thousand Jews were "cut to the heart" after realising that they killed their promised Messiah. We also read of Saul renamed Paul who "kicked against the goads" before his encounter with the Lord on the Damascus Road. This could be the result of a conviction of sin due to hearing Steven's discourse recorded in Acts 7. In the eighth chapter, we have Philip in Samaria who proclaimed Jesus as the Christ. Whether any conviction of sin occurred, we are not told, but many believed and were healed by means of miracles performed there. And this is why ALL miracles were performed throughout the New Testament - to prove that Jesus is the Christ and by believing one can receive eternal life.

The case of Peter and the Sorcerer: the charge against him was about offering money for his share in ministering of the Holy Spirit, not in his sorcery itself. No doubt, the ability to perform miracles would heighten his reputation and would have given a massive boost to his business. The request was denied due to wrong motives. Yet earlier in verse 13 we are told that the sorcerer believed and was baptised by Philip. If his belief was genuine (there is no reason it wasn't) then Peter, in his rebuke, threatened physical death rather than eternal death, so no bad reputation would spread before unbelievers. The same applying to Ananias and Sapphira, whose bodies were destroyed so the church would not suffer a blow to its reputation before men. These two, by believing that Jesus is the Christ, also went to Heaven.

Then there is the case of Philip and the Ethiopian. We meet this eunuch in his cart, reading a portion of Isaiah, the bit about being cut off (slain) and pondering on whether the prophet was referring to himself or someone else. Philip boarded the chariot and explained that Isaiah was foretelling of Jesus being the Messiah, and yes, he was cut off - he was crucified. There was nothing told about the eunuch's conviction of his sin. He simply asked what was stopping him being baptised, and Philip agreed to his willingness to be submerged in water.

The conversion of Cornelius and his household is another case where little, if any, conviction of sin came before conversion. Peter's message was about Jesus, having been crucified, proved his status as the Christ by rising from the dead. Apparently, the Holy Spirit fell on them all the moment they believed.

Acts 13:13 onward is a narration of the history of Israel given by Paul and Barnabas, climaxing in Jesus Christ crucified, and then risen again, proving to be the Messiah. Going through the whole of Acts of the Apostles, the theme is Jesus crucified, then risen again to prove that he is the Christ. And the theme is always believing this and receiving eternal life. The Philippian jailer was another example. Here Paul and Silas were singing praises to God. Then an earthquake occurred which caused all the prison cell doors to fly open. The jailer, believing that all the inmates had escaped, drew his sword in the belief that the Authorities were going to execute him anyway. So he decided on suicide instead. Paul then cried out not to harm himself. Instead he asked what to do to be saved. The jailer was, most likely asking how he could be spared from the Authorities. Paul had deeper, more eternal things in mind. If he believed on Jesus as the Christ, he would receive eternal life. There is, apparently, no narration about his conviction of his sins.

And so it goes on. I have pondered, in preparation of this blog, if England being a Christian country, are most people here are saved, just because having been born here, we have a much greater chance of eternal life than the Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus or any other non-Christian countries or religions. We celebrate Christmas, Good Friday, and Easter every year. In other words, we believe that Jesus is the Christ, having a miraculous birth, death and resurrection. Really?

Actually, there seem to be a difference between true belief and nominally. The vast majority of the English do not have a new birth. There seems to be a difference between growing up with a background knowledge of Christianity and taking it for granted - from that of a trusting faith that Jesus is the Christ which brings a re-birth of the spirit and adoption as children of God. In fact, in my last blog, I emphasised that higher education and academic achievement has turned much more of the population away from the faith in God than towards it.

So the conviction of sin prior to conversion may be a good thing. But to whom this conviction may be suitable depends on the individual concerned. What I disagree with our Facebook friend and with the Calvary Community Church is about the "one size fits all" concept that no true conversion can take place without the conviction of sin beforehand. Perhaps here in England, a conviction of sin may indeed be far more of a necessity than in the ancient Middle East. But with the two guys at the Maltese pub, I left it for the Holy Spirit to convict their sin of Freemasonry. All I had the privilege was to tell them that Jesus is indeed the Christ, and not to judge them.

Jesus, Friend of Sinners

My wife and I had returned from a holiday (vacation) in Malta, to celebrate our 13th Wedding Anniversary. We loved this little southern Mediterranean island with its agreeable climate, warm weather, turquoise sea and a dramatic coastline with cliffs and spectacular caves. Furthermore, the Maltese seemed to have been much more cheerful and more laid back than the average Briton. Surely, much of this has to do with the warm weather.

Two attractions caught our attention. One was the Blue Lagoon, on the tiny island of Comino, just off the north coast of the much larger island of Malta. This partially enclosed area of sea was made beautifully turquoise by a sandy seabed.

The Blue Lagoon, Comino Island, Malta

Its beauty made it a popular tourist attraction despite lacking of any proper beaches. Snorkeling or swimming with goggles is highly recommended to avoid the occasional jellyfish, which can only be seen with proper underwater vision. Just a little above the lagoon, a trail offers great views of the attraction, such as the pic posted above, taken from the trail. Then we had the usual money-spinning paraphernalia: mobile kiosks who offered to fill our hungry stomachs for a rather exorbitant price!

But the top attraction, in my opinion, had to be the Blue Grotto, on the south side of Malta itself. It's a large cave penetrating into the cliff, which also boast a natural arch and a number of other caves. Fishermen in the area are doing a roaring trade escorting tourists like us to the Grotto for just a few euros for a thirty-minute trip. Inside the Grotto, chemicals of the rocks beneath turn the water into a glowing azure blue, as if there was a fluorescent light unit underwater.

Azure waters in the Blue Grotto.

During our visit the the Grotto, I was one of a minority of tourists to enjoy a swim inside the cave. It was such an exhilarating experience, no doubt, would stay with me for life. The azure waters was not cold but pleasant, its crystal clearness reminding me of that river flowing from the throne of God in Heaven. I hope you enjoy these pics. To me, this is just a foretaste of the eternal joy every believer in Jesus Christ as Saviour will experience in the presence of God forever.

Swimming in the azure blue waters in the Grotto was one of the highlights of the entire holiday!

The entire holiday was God's blessing to us, a demonstration of undeserved grace, goodness and mercy. But the most important aspect of the vacation was for Alex and I spending time together. Although here we appreciated the beauty and majesty of God in his creation, I believe that our relationship as husband and wife is more important to God, for this has eternal consequence, while even the most beautiful or aesthetic natural features of our planet are temporary and will come under judgement when our fallen world will be destroyed and re-created.

Our hotel room faced the street, where nearby a bar kept revellers drinking until two in the morning. As the laughter and guffaws echoed through otherwise an empty street relatively free of traffic, it was one of these evenings that due to a thirst, we bought a drink in the bar ourselves. Wading through the crowd, we saw two vacant seats at an outside table which was occupied by two men who were guffawing and sharing crude jokes with each other. I asked them if those seats were already taken, and when we received a negative answer, Alex and I settled at the same table with them.

We started chatting, and it soon became apparent that the bonding between my wife and myself impressed them. A saucy joke was cracked and all four of us broke into laughter. Then a little more seriously, one of them asked where and how we met. Now the crunch had come. Digging for courage, I told them quite openly that we met at our local church, then told them straight that Jesus Christ is my Saviour and Lord, and I felt my spirit lifted up. The rebuffs I was expecting didn't come. Instead they were hesitating as one of them said that we all should respect each other's beliefs. They explained to us that they had to go to a meeting in Valletta (capital of Malta) the next day for an important celebration. Due to their hesitating, it took a while for me to find out what this meeting was about.

Eventually, we were told that one of them will be promoted to a higher degree at the Masonic lodge. The conversation then carried on about Freemasonry and the efforts they put in to defend their group and the benefits it offered. Not once did I say a negative word against it.

That was the crux of it all. They feared judgement from us. I felt, rightly, that I was in no position to judge. But they did not realise that at first. Hence their hesitation to come straight out with it. This made me think about the life of Jesus Christ when he was here with us. He always went to a very similar place to the pub we sat at. There must have been revellers in his day, laughing, guffawing, telling crude jokes and sending waves of laughter. Those people were looked down upon by the scribes and the Pharisees, who referred to them as "the tax collectors and sinners." They were seen as "defiled" by many a Jew, even despised by the local fishermen for demanding a share of their catch, which was then sold and the proceeds went to the Romans, who ruled over their land at that time. Even the fishermen themselves were prone to obscene language. Peter was such a one. When challenged whether he was one of Jesus' followers, he "began to curse and swear, saying, I know not the man" (Matthew 26:74, Mark 14:71.)

On one occasion, Jesus was heading towards Matthew's house and according to Luke, (5:27-32) there was a crowd of publicans who most likely were revelling, telling crude jokes, teased one another and a frequent swear word thrown into the air. Yet Jesus made no hesitation to keep company with them, despite the protestations of the Pharisees. On such an occasion, he even went so far to say that they will enter the Kingdom of God before the religious.

Jesus' presence must have had an impact on them. They became very fond of him. It became a thin line to cross. They had only to believe that he was their Messiah, and they were saved. But for Jesus to win their hearts, he could not have judged them or shown condemnation, and perhaps most important of all, never looked down on them, nor displayed class discrimination, nor turned up his nose over their lack of academic achievements. Instead he loved them and invited them into his Kingdom. Peter and Matthew (or Levi) were two prime examples. Before Jesus came along, the two were sworn enemies, due to Levi's betrayal to the Romans and greater hardship imposed on the fishing trade. But not only did the love of Jesus turned their hostility to friendship and eventually to close brotherhood, but the cursing, swearing fisherman became the chief elder of the church in Jerusalem. Matthew, who most likely hung out with prostitutes (the meaning of "tax collectors and sinners") had the privilege to write his Gospel, which to this day revered as sacred Scripture, equal in inspiration to the writings of Moses. Such is the transforming power of God through love!

The love of Jesus and his friendship with sinners turned the world of his day upside down. Even after his Resurrection and Ascension, people of all classes were amazed at the wisdom and power of the apostles, exclaiming that they were ignorant and unlearned men. The Holy Spirit certainly had no problem with one so unschooled.

Gosh, how different is all this in the UK! Here, in the last few centuries, education played a major role in church leadership. It is a known fact that the gene pool for future leaders of the Anglican Church is to be found at Oxbridge, the two top universities in Britain, if not in the world. As far as I remember, the Archbishop of Canterbury, second only to the Queen, always had "Dr." as his title. For example, our present Archbishop is Dr. Rowan Williams, who has been serving from February 27th, 2003. It is very much a reflection of all our churches in the UK at present.

I used to watch a BBC programme, Last Man Standing, where a group of individuals travelled to different countries to contest in sports known only to the inhabitants. One of the contestants was a student theologian at Oxford University. Not only was he very academic, but he loved playing both rugby and cricket. He was a true-blue Tory-voting Englishman - highly educated, a good sportsman, self reserved, stiff upper lip, stoic and showing emotional restraint. A dynamic contrast to Peter and Matthew! But the very candidate all English church pastors and leaders would fall over themselves to have on their staff, deaconate, eldership or committee.

What amazes me is that if class and academics were so important to church leadership, then surely, England would have the most dynamic churches in the world, together with the highest percentage of the saved in the general population. Of course, how God would have coped with the likes of Peter and Matthew (among others) would be a small matter swept under the carpet. Nevertheless, with the rising tide of academic achievement, spiritual rebirth must follow suit.

Except it is nothing like that. Robert Darwin, for one, was a church minister. He wanted his son, Charles to follow in his footsteps. Instead, he had a far greater interest in biology. His theory of Evolution by Natural Selection paved the way for the greatest abandoning of belief in God the UK had ever suffered. On top of this, I have seen that the evaluation of a person by church elders was usually based on his academic standing rather than spiritual vitality. Within the last forty years, I have watched young graduates, who held to the belief in Evolution, take up leadership among the juniors and even housegroups.

That is a shame. Our church at Ascot is one good example of this cultural bias. A year or two ago, a group of our elders paid a visit to Royal Holloway, part of London University. The result that a group of students joining us every Sunday, swelling the congregation. In part, that is very good. It is an excellent idea that these undergraduates receive sound Bible teaching and fellowship which will guide them through life. I, for one, am all for students pouring into our church for their spiritual edification, teaching and for a closer walk with God. But while this was happening, the common man in the street remain unreached. Little or no effort is made to enter a rowdy pub and absorb the revelling, swearing, crude jokes, smut and whatever that seemed so ungodly in order to win them to the church and salvation in Christ.

Personally, I don't think it's snobbery. I believe it is fear. Fear of intimidation. Exactly the kind of fear felt by Peter and his friends at the time of the Resurrection. Only the Holy Spirit turned their fear to courage and strong love for their fellowman which brought on boldness.

I too felt reserved about confessing our church affiliation to those two guys at the bar. I had to dig into my soul for courage. So this blog is not a put down to the churches in England. Rather it is a plea to let the Holy Spirit fill our lives to love all in every class and academic strata.