The Value of Friendship, and Moralism.

In the Old Testament section of the Bible, there is a story of two young men, David and Jonathan, whose friendship had become the flagship of what companionship should be like, a yardstick for all other relationships to look upon and emulate.

David and Jonathan.

Jonathan was the son of King Saul, the first king of Israel whom God appointed with the anointing of oil by the seer, Samuel. One day, God instructed Saul through the mouth of Samuel to slay all the Amalekites - men, women, adolescents, children, and infants - and all their livestock - their sheep, cattle, donkeys, camels, and any other domesticated beast which were counted as their property.

Just to diverge here, this is a prime example of a story that would give the atheist a good reason to discredit the historicity of the Bible and to deny the existence of "a loving, benevolent, caring God." Why would God want to snuff out the lives of a non-Jewish nation, especially children? This is the question put out by such unbelievers daily, especially through YouTube, and watched by millions. And I feel my spirit grieve as the Bible is ridiculed on a national basis. And little wonder why we are in the present political, health and economic mess? Therefore, I'll go into some detail here.

According to 1 Samuel 15:2, the Amalekites were to be punished for attempting to wipe out Israel from the land just after crossing the Red Sea during their exodus from Egypt, as recorded in Exodus 17:8-16. Then in verse 16 itself, God promises to be at war with the Amalekites into the future, from generation to generation.

With such a nature of the story, it's little wonder that this is throwing fuel into the atheist's fire! When a "loving, benevolent, caring God" orders the destruction of men, women, children and infants, the latter having no idea of their nation's history and therefore, had no part in a battle that had taken place hundreds of years before any of them were born, I can't help but step back in shock! Yet, God still pronounced them guilty - guilty of their attempt to annihilate the ancient Israelites centuries earlier. How could a "loving, benevolent, caring God" do a thing like that?

With the added instruction to slay all their livestock - domesticated animals owned by the Amalekites in the same way as a modern farmer would keep sheep and cattle - why they too must pay for the sins of their long-gone human owners, it's a mystery to anyone who has an open mind. As with anyone with some rational thinking, this was one of several issues I had to wrestle with when reading the Bible. As with the issue with the bottles as discussed in my last blog, along with Balaam the prophet and the talking donkey (Numbers 22:21-41) and how a shadow on a sundial managed to move backwards (2 Kings 20:1-11) - and then I wonder why an Amalekite child was slain in mass bloodshed while, more than a thousand years later, Jesus blessed little children and declared that the Kingdom of God was theirs.

Indeed, by first sight, the atheist and the sceptic would have a field day! This, along with how a barge the size of Noah's ark can hold all the species of land animals that had ever existed, dinosaurs included, would make me embarrassed to be a Christian, would it not? Especially when both Jesus Christ and the Apostles had endorsed the historicity of such events. And then the cartoon version of Noah's Ark is presented looking like a rather skimpy bathtub incapable of carrying any large number of beasts.

Going back to the Amalekites, why did God have such an issue with them? What was it about them that had made the Almighty decide to terminate their existence at the hands of King Saul?

There is a need to go back to the beginning. According to Genesis 36:12, the father of the Amalekite nation was Amalek, the grandson of Esau. Esau was the twin brother of Jacob (renamed Israel) and grandsons of Abraham. Esau, who was the firstborn of the two brothers, was also the favourite son of his father Isaac, and he wanted to give his older son a special blessing. But Isaac's wife and mother of the boys, Rebekah, had a preference for Jacob, and she wanted him blessed instead of Esau. By using deception, Jacob was able to fool his elderly father who was already blind through age. In Esau's absence, Jacob stole both Esau's birthright and blessing. Furious with rage after finding out that his younger brother had stolen the blessing originally intended for him, he set his mind to kill him after the death of their father.

Rebekah, sensing the emergency, sent her favourite son to exile from his own family, to live with his uncle Laban, several days journey away. At his uncle's tent, Jacob married both of Laban's daughters, Leah and Rachel, and between them, along with their concubines, he fathered twelve sons who grew up to be the heads of twelve tribes of Israel. Meanwhile, Esau had children by three wives, and one of them became the grandmother of Amalek, whose descendants were an offshoot from the fledgling nation of Edom, of which Esau was the founding father.

It was the Amalekites who were most determined to destroy Israel in revenge for Isaac's blessing stolen from them. Being a stronger warrior people, they posed a real threat to Israel. As soon as the Israelites had crossed the Red Sea on their way to the Promised Land, they were immediately attacked by the Amalekites. It took a miracle of God through Moses for Israel to finally defeat Amalek.

Noah's Ark is brought to ridicule by atheists.

And so, with Amalek defeated under the hand of King Saul after centuries of invasion and attack, the Hebrew monarch approaches Samuel with a greeting, expecting praise from the seer. When instead, the king was rebuked for keeping some of the animals for sacrifice, he was shocked, and even more so after receiving news that he and his son Jonathan were rejected from founding Israel's royal dynasty.

Why have I got into so much detail on Israel's hostile relationship with Amalek? To show that the general historic value recorded in the Bible is well within credibility, thus, an answer to the atheist and the sceptic's mockery, so widely broadcast on the Internet. The Bible reveals what human nature is like, and details both friendship and enmity with an equal realistic scope, so true to life today. Also, as one who loves Israel, having spent up to 22 weeks of my life in the Holy Land, I hope this may provide a plausible answer to the atheist's scepticism and mockery. And so, a strong bond exists between a royal prince and a shepherd's son.

I have read that the friendship between David and Jonathan could be regarded as a bromance. A bromance is an asexual but strong friendship between two people of the same gender. Both partners are heterosexual, with Jonathan quite likely already married and having a son, Mephibosheth.

As the Bible also says that the friendship between two or more men is like the sweet fragrance of the oil which flows down Aaron's head. A poetic way of saying that friendship is pleasing to God. However, during my younger days of the 1970s, all I had to do was to visit the sauna suite at our local leisure centre, and it's more than likely that I exit the building with someone I had befriended whilst bathed. And he would offer me a lift home which was only a short distance away. With such kindness taken into consideration, I felt that it was right to invite him into my apartment for coffee and a chat. 

The friendship between us may last for several weeks, even months. Then, one evening, he drops a hint that he's interested in those bits and pieces beneath my waistline and hidden by my trousers. Despite my own gullibility coming from innocence, I still insisted that I wasn't interested, and that ended the friendship.

In the 1970s in particular, that sort of approach occurred frequently. And not only locally, but they occurred whilst backpacking Italy in 1975, Israel in 1976, and the USA during both 1977 and 1978. And right throughout those occasions, I was already a Christian. However, my lack of interest in sex wasn't solely due to Christian convictions, as I was still very young in the faith. Rather it was more of a lack of desire, even a sense of disgust.

But even as a Christian, I still valued their friendships, as far as I was concerned, they were still human beings, people still loved by God and in need of his grace and forgiveness. In this mode of thinking, I would have still accepted their offer of friendship, such as chatting over coffee, a walk in the park, visiting a pub - whatever - as long as we stayed out of the bedroom. Such a friendship, in my mind, could have still flourished.

One area which I have come to learn by experience, and it's being a moralist. This means a lack of wrongdoing coupled with a judgemental attitude and a complete lack of love and forgiveness. And experience had taught me that a moralist is very much tied with a church-goer. To see this in practice, let's suppose that I am a moralist. But first, I'll just reiterate what had happened when I refused any sexual advance. It was the other person making the advance, and not me, who ended the friendship by walking out of the front door in a huff, but with no angry or sad words spoken. Had he apologised, chances were that I would have forgiven him, and asked him not to try that again, and had he agreed, continued with the friendship, maybe with the hope of gradually winning him to Christ.

But if I was a moralist, chances were that I would have thrown him out of my apartment (or stormed out, had that happened at his home) and angrily distance myself from him, with me insisting that our friendship is over. I would have had a sense of self-righteousness, to be glad that I'm not that way inclined like he is, and thus more deserving of heaven than he could ever be. Whilst thanking God that I'm not that way inclined, there is absolutely no love, no forgiveness, he becomes an object of disdain, to be ignored and avoided. If ever he's seen walking into a church meeting, I would have made sure that I was sitting at the far side of the room, and preferably, way behind him. And as a final coup de gras, I would not want him to come to Christ and be saved. After all, why should he go to heaven if I never had such perverse desires?

With an attitude like that, it's no wonder that in the New Testament, three witnesses testified against the moral-bound Pharisees and members of the Jewish Sanhedrin. The three were John the Baptist, Jesus Christ, and Stephen. Both John and Jesus referred to them as a brood of vipers, while Stephen referred to them as stiff-necked. Jesus explains why they are referred to as such:-

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! You tithe mint, dill and cumin, and yet you have neglected the weightier matters of the law - justice, mercy and faithfulness...Matthew 23:23.

Dill, tithed in Christ's day.

As a moralist, I would have paid special attention to attending prayer meetings, concentrated on tithing, and perhaps even spent time straightening my tie! Whether I tithed on a weekly or monthly basis, chances were I would have felt a sense of self-satisfaction, having met the basic requirements of "giving to the Lord." But any thought of aiding financially to the pervert who tried it on me would have sent shivers down my spine. Unless he reforms, no way would I give him any money to help him out. As far as I'm aware, he's a sinner and therefore he deserves what he's going through!

What then? Is doing the right thing a bad idea? No, it isn't bad in itself. If someone wants to tithe, then let him tithe, that's a good thing. But he should never judge anyone who doesn't tithe regularly, or not tithe at all. Likewise, it was fine for me to refuse any sexual approach. It was the right thing to do. But to shut him out without any forgiveness or even giving advice would be wrong. It could even drive the other person to suicide.

Finally, what would Jesus have done had he been approached by a homosexual? Condemn him to hell? Most unlikely. Rather, He would have told him to follow Him with a promise that He'll make him a fisher of men in a much better way!

Puzzling Over a Bottle...

It was the Summer of 1972. That was the year when a college mate and I flew to Spain. A unique holiday, as it was my first trip abroad without my parents. As a nineteen-year-old, it was a taste of freedom. Yep, that meant getting stoned out of my wits every evening through the cheap wine Spain had to offer. One night, I staggered back to the hotel late at night and crawled into a bath and slept in my own vomit.

All this whilst my college friend remained calm, almost serene. Having a much greater sense of self-control, including his emotions, here was a situation when he slept peacefully in his clean bed whilst I spent that night in a bathtub in a pool of regurgitated wine - a sad reflection of my spiritual and social state as a teenage atheist - especially after being dumped by a former girlfriend. Then, after daybreak and thorough cleanup, we both made our way downstairs to the hotel restaurant for breakfast, followed by the rest of the day sunbathing on the beach.

Just back from Spain, July 1972.

After returning home, I looked at the lifesize mirror that adorned the bedroom wardrobe. Surely, I could put this magnificently slim body of mine to good use rather than squander myself on alcohol. Already a good swimmer, I made the decision to join the Reading Life-Saving Club, where, as a member, not only would I develop the skills to rescue a distressed person out of deep water but also learn about resuscitation with additional knowledge of human anatomy.

By December of that year, then twenty years old, I was one of the candidates who took the Bronze Medallion test, both in rescuing someone in distress whilst fully clothed (in pyjamas) and a practical demonstration on the resuscitation, but also to answer some questions during a theory test as well. I passed. The actual possession of the bronze medallion qualified me to work as a full-time lifeguard anywhere in the UK and perhaps around the world too, whether poolside or on the beach.*

And during one wet Saturday evening in December 1972 and after being stopped in the street by two young lads of my age, I invited these lads to a pub. After buying each a drink, they opened a Bible. Well, fancy that! A Bible in the pub! I was shown some verses, especially from the Gospel of John and also Revelation 3:20. This idea of inviting Jesus Christ into my heart, that is, the heart of my soul, to "sup with me and me with him" - along with being convinced that it was God who brought me to these lads in the first place - began a threefold revolution that would forever change my life. On the spiritual side, a rebirth of the spirit and a new desire to read the Bible and to gain knowledge of it. Church life, however, would not begin until somewhere between several months to a year later.

On the social side, deliberately getting drunk to cover my sorrows over the loss of a girlfriend also drew to a close by my conversion. This was replaced with getting to grips with Dad's old Bible, a King James Version given to him years earlier by a couple of Jehovah's Witnesses (their New World Translation didn't exist back then). This same Bible - which I made every effort to get to grips with its rather archaic language - was literally ripped to shreds by my angry father. This was a prompt for me to fly the nest, which I eventually did in 1976. At the workplace, I wasn't ashamed or embarrassed to declare quite openly that Jesus Christ is the risen Son of God.

The third tenet of this threefold revolution had to do with travel. Gone are the alcohol-drenched package holidays for sunseekers. Getting drunk and being sick in the bath and passing out in my own vomit was replaced with independent backpacking. This was not only much more wholesome and adventurous but also educational, a two-fold embracing of geology and ancient history. That same year - 1973 - not only had I climbed alone up the slopes of Mont Vesuvio and peered into its crater, but I also walked the streets of the ancient ruins of Pompeii. Thus learning much about life under Rome and becoming familiar with their abundance of wine amphorae, one of the key items that got me asking questions springing out from the regular reading of the Bible.

However, also during the Spring of 1973, I left my old factory job to join a team of pool attendants at Reading Central Pool (now demolished and replaced by an apartment block.) Although my job title was Pool Attendant, in reality, I was a full-time lifeguard who had to attend regular in-job refresher training, both in and out of the pool, to keep my skills finely honed. Finally, I was transferred from the Central Pool, at the time patrolled by three lifeguards, to the older and more ornate Arthur Hill Baths at the other side of town. 

Here, I was on my own and at times, in full charge of the pool. It was here at Arthur Hill's where I first qualified as a lifeguard. (Arthur Hill himself was the founder who financed the pool to be built during 1911 and then donated the facility to the town council after it opened in November of that year.)

On a typical weekday during school term, the pool would open early for the Early Bird swimmers. One early bird was an elderly war veteran with one of his arms blown off, leaving a stump ending just below his shoulder. This quiet, friendly chap faithfully arrived on the dot every weekday morning for a thirty-minute swim. After the Early Bird sessions were over, the schools began to arrive. Swimming classes were held here, catering to students from primary to teenagers. Then the lunch break when the pool closed to the public for an hour before reopening to receive more school classes. Finally, in the evenings there was either public swimming or club meetings, including the Reading Life Saving Club, which by then, my day's duty was over.

It was on one of these lunch breaks when I sat alone in the small staff room, still damp from a short swim I had just enjoyed during the lunch closure, with both lunch and the KJV Bible I took out of Dad's bookshelf and brought to work with me.

During one of my daily readings, I came across this:

And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish. But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved. No man having drunk old wine straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better. - Luke 5:37-39.

A collection of ancient Amphorae.

Of the entire Bible, what the heck was this? This was Jesus himself speaking. I was astonished! What difference does it make what goes into these bottles? Whether, it's old wine, new wine, warm water, cold water, even urine, what difference does it make? As far as I know, I had never known a glass bottle break under the nature of its contents except, perhaps, boiling water. I was disturbed by these verses, as I've already accepted the Bible as the inspired Word of God. What is going on?

Eventually, I had to come to terms with what these verses were saying. If two millennia in the past, glass bottles were made with either a different material or its composition was different to our version, so be it. How strange was it for someone growing up during the second half of the 20th Century to have his range of imagination limited to what he sees in his own day? All I had ever known, wine bottles were either of clear glass or of coloured glass, usually green. Therefore, it's inevitable that I thought that they were around during Roman times.

Staying with wines, the vineyard, and where the wine was stored, I once heard a story during a sermon preached one evening back in the early seventies. It concerned what Jesus was saying in John 15. A vine-grower who was well experienced in his vocation was converted to Christ as his Saviour, and he started to read the Bible. Eventually, he came across the 15th chapter of John's Gospel, and he was greatly disturbed by what Jesus was teaching here. As Jesus was telling his disciples to remain in him and he in them, he also said that every branch (of the vine) that does not bear any fruit, it will be cut off from the vine altogether (or taken away -KJV) - John 15:2.

The vine-grower was very troubled by this verse. Jesus was a carpenter. How could he possibly know anything about keeping and looking after vineyards? Had he ever worked in a vineyard? Had he got it all wrong? He went to visit his pastor, explaining his trouble over that particular verse.

The pastor had to do quite a bit of research. He went through various commentaries and study aids, then he called the troubled man back.

He explained that what Jesus meant was that if a branch of the vine isn't bearing fruit, then it's not cut off or severed from the vine. Rather, what the gardener does is lift the branch into the sunlight. When the vineyard keeper heard this, he was greatly relieved. He had already known, by his experience, that young branches don't yet bear fruit. Instead, they are lifted up to catch the maximum sunlight for the first year. And then, when it does bear fruit, the first grapes are generally of poor quality, so the gardener prunes, that is, to rid the branch of such grapes. By doing this, he can guarantee that the next year's crop will bring out the best grapes from that branch.

It's a beautiful illustration. A newly-converted Christian shouldn't be expected to bear fruit straight away. Rather, he should learn how to be filled with the Holy Spirit, read the Bible, and join a Christ-honouring church to receive sound teaching, encouragement and fellowship. Unfortunately, the English translators weren't too sure how to tackle the Greek language, as back in those days, especially around 1611 when the KJV was translated, no one in this country knew how to grow grapes, as we don't have the right climate. Therefore, according to the church pastor, the translators assumed that Jesus meant that the unfruitful branch was to be severed from the tree altogether. Instead, Jesus actually meant the young branch is to be lifted up into the sunshine.

Perhaps, the same applied to the "bottles" that would burst if the wrong kind of wine was poured into them. Apparently, in 1611, we had glass wine bottles back then as we do now. Therefore, it came as no real surprise that the English translators had to grapple with the Greek word which means wineskins. It seems that in the ancient Middle East, wineskins were the best way to carry and store wine, and the vintner at the time had to ensure that the appropriate wineskin was compatible with the age of the wine.

I am aware that there are verses in the Bible that may be difficult to understand. John 15:6 is one example. It says that if a man doesn't abide in Christ, then he is like a branch that is cast off and dies. Such branches are then bundled up and thrown into the fire. A branch cast off? There are Christians who don't believe in the eternal security of the believer and instead, insist that salvation can be lost or forfeited. These people are known as Arminians, from the 16th Century Dutch theologian Jacob Arminius, who taught these things.

A wineskin was known by Jesus.

Here, I shall be as simple as I can, mainly for the unchurched. When someone first believes in Jesus Christ and trusts him to save, then the righteousness of Christ is imputed into his spiritual account. That means God the Father sees this man in the same way he sees his beloved Son. The Christian is in Christ and Christ is in him. Paul the apostle writes quite a bit about this, and he devotes chapters 3, 4, and 5 in his letter to the Romans on this topic alone, quoting the case with Abraham, recorded in Genesis 15:6: Abraham believed the LORD and it was credited to him as righteousness.

Jesus himself backs this up when he says,

He whom the Father gives to me shall come to me, and he who comes to me I will in no wise cast out. - John 6:37, also John 10:27-30.

Therefore, to say that a man who doesn't abide in Christ will be like a dead branch cast out, bundled and burned can mean one of two lines of thought:

1. Referring to one who has heard the Gospel but still doesn't believe. Or refuses to believe.

2. He is a true believer, but due to continual disobedience, he dies prematurely. His body goes to the grave, his fruits are burned up at the Judgement Seat of Christ, but he will still be saved and go to Heaven. Due to the righteousness of Christ already credited to him, he cannot perish. And where is this in Scripture? I Corinthians 3:15.

I have written this blog with the hope that a proper understanding of the Bible is very important for a full Christian life. 

Even if a new glass bottle breaks if you pour old wine into it, and vice versa.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Later changed when qualification tests were upgraded to a higher level. The Bronze Medallion is now superseded by the National Pool Lifeguard Qualification or the NPLQ certificate. Beach lifeguards are now further trained to a higher grade to qualify as beach lifesavers and are close to being paramedics.

The Bible and the Dancing Doll

My beloved and I were sitting on the couch, enjoying some intimacy after switching off the TV, when, very unexpectedly, there was a sudden "clink". I turned round to see that an empty pint glass had apparently moved on its own and then fell to its side. Thank goodness there was no liquid in it. My immediate reaction was, Oh dear! Did I accidentally kick it? I looked down. My nearest foot was about a metre away from the glass, and I can't recall moving either my foot or the glass.

We both looked at each other in surprise. Memories came back to when our hi-fi system turned itself on during the small hours of the morning whilst we were both in bed. This had happened two or three times, and on each occasion, I had to creep downstairs, bleary-eyed, to turn off the unit. 

Okay, I have watched such phenomena on YouTube. But having the video camera already set up and running before the object moved has made me query its genuineness. After all, some people would do anything for a few minutes of fame by attempting to scare us out of our wits! A fine nylon thread or a length of white cotton on the white worktop can achieve miracles.

Or at a seance. If sitting around the table, things you expect to happen does happen, then the best thing to do is to ask for your money back. Trickery - such as bare-toe touching under the table - a stray foot and - viola! A supernatural occurrence! The same for any ghostly sound or music coming from behind the closed curtain or from the ceiling. You can guarantee that it's all fakery. You go home with a sense of uncertainty whilst the "medium" heads for the bank.

And there's always the story I once made up when I contributed to a website forum:

It's Halloween and you're at a funfair. The central attraction is the Haunted House, very similar to the Haunted Mansion that sits in the heart of the New Orleans section of Disneyland. As you walk through the gloomy corridors and enter musty rooms, you see the closed curtains move, hear weird noises coming from odd places, dolls whose heads turn as their eyes follow you as you walk past, the lid of a coffin opens, cackles, and so on. Suddenly, all goes completely dark and utter silence bathes the house. Nothing moves. Nothing is heard. Even the dolls now ignore you. Amidst the silence, a moan is heard. It came from the corridor wall right beside you. It was a moan of genuine distress. This time, you feel your blood running cold and your hair stand on end. No rotor or electric-powered gadget this time. The moan was too real.

You notice a faint outline of a door where the sound came from. You push on the door, and it flies open to reveal a couple of people in the control room, each sitting in front of a blank computer screen and moaning about the sudden power cut...

Not so unrealistic. During my late teens and twenties, I went alone to the cinema purposely to watch a horror movie. Movies such as Dracula and Poltergeist. The story might have been utter nonsense, but the plot contained some frightening scenes. There is something about desiring fright, especially among courting or married couples watching the film. One of the benefits of a scare is that both partners are in each other's arms - the one wanting protection and the other wanting to protect, hence enhancing the relationship - according to some psychologists.

But the end always provides relief. Like in the Dracula movie. In the end, the open coffin in which the Count lay was mistakenly left outside just as the sun rose. The camera zoomed onto the sun with the sound of a thunderous hum. And the body in the coffin wilted in the sunlight, turning to ashes, never to come to life again. The force of the powerful sun had melted away any fears I might have had, and I left the cinema feeling both relieved and entertained.

Back in the nineties, a group of us from our church spent a day at Thorpe Park, a permanent fun resort near the River Thames, and surrounded by lakes. The pre-teenage son of one of the elders wanted to ride on the Ghost Train. But his father refused to let him board the ride. I was walking nearby, and I said to him that it's nothing more than a group of plastic dancing dolls powered by hidden rotors, accompanied by sounds from hidden speakers. But the father was insistent. No ghost train rides.

I have, ever since, wondered how the son took it all. Did he grow up without ever considering a ride in the ghost train, and perhaps later, instruct his own children never to go near the ride? Or did he wait a couple of years, and then spent a day at Thorpe Park with his friends, and included a ride on the ghost train?

Perhaps it's much to do with temperament. Maybe with one child or adolescent, a genuine fear of such rides may keep him away for life. Or, as in my case, a sense of curiosity overriding any warning given, and boards the ride. Such is the curiosity satisfied. Or he may go away with a feeling that these "scare rides" was not as "cracked up" as first imagined. That was my thoughts after a ride on the ghost train at the Battersea Park funfair. The ghost train wasn't scary enough for me to come out shaking. Unfortunately, the funfair closed permanently in 1974 following a fatal roller-coaster accident in 1972. 

Thorpe Park has modernised since the 1990s!

I have read about Christians staying away from the cinema and hence, fulfilling their evangelistic duties. Perhaps the Christian parent at Thorpe Park thought that his son riding a ghost train would open the door for demonic influence. Maybe he had a point. But I tend to lean on the idea that temperament should determine whether one should ride a ghost train or watch a horror movie, rather than mere Christian restrictions. For example, a child or adolescent may prone to be fearful. He may or may not have Christian parents. Therefore, Dad should still advise him that going on the ride could do him some emotional damage. On the other hand, he could warn the older brother not to go to such rides "on Christian principles" - regardless of his own religious beliefs - but his son will go, nevertheless, and feel none the worse afterwards.

And so, with tons of fakery associated with stories of the supernatural, I have wondered whether, among all the stones on the stream bed, a lump of coal might just be discovered. Hence my perception of these ghost stories, photos, and videos. Mostly fake. I remember, when I was an adolescent, a photo of a ghost was apparently snapped inside the Newby Church of Christ the Consoler, North Yorkshire, in 1963. Furthermore, the spectre was actually posing at the camera in readiness. And so, the Sunday national newspaper headline blazed the question, Did the Reverend snap a ghost? across the front page.

Although an excellent work of art, even at a young age, I had some suspicions - although I also shook with fear at the time. Looking closely, the two eyeless sockets looked more like two holes cut in a sheet than that of a decomposing corpse. And the sheet - minus a nose and mouth - looked as if it was draped over a tall, rigid stand and dressed in monk's clothing. 

Later in life, as I grew in experience with photography, I have worked out how it could be done - the double exposure trick. The sheet, with the two holes for eye sockets, is draped over a stand, and it's then dressed in dark grey clothing. A picture is then taken of it with a black background. Then the inside of the church is taken without winding the film, hence, creating a double exposure. So convincing was the result, either the paper thought it was genuine, or knew of the fakery - and published it as a money-spinner. Good thinking! But how much of the nation actually fell for it?

Although with the case of our hi-fi turning itself on during the night, that is, around 2.00 am on each of the three nights, along with the sudden movement of the pint glass, were genuine cases or not, I prefer not to say. Simply, we do not know. However, history does tell us that John Wesley, during the middle of one night, woke up to see Satan sitting at the foot of his bed. Wesley then said, Oh, it's just you, rolled over and went back to sleep. His knowledge that the Devil was defeated by the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ had released him from any fears. And when my wife showed alarm at the pint glass, I repeated the mantra: He who is in you is greater than he who is in the world - 1 John 4:4. 

This seems to confirm that the Bible supports the issue of discarnate spirits. Jesus himself had come across many of them during his ministry. And so did the apostles, especially Paul.

According to Creation Ministries International, the origin of demons were not actually the fallen angels themselves, but rather the discarnate spirits of the Nephilim  - the offspring between fallen angels and "the daughters of men", that is, human women alive before the Flood, as narrated in Genesis 6:1-6. As they carried only half of the human genome, that is, their mother's 23 chromosomes, and the other 23 from the fallen angel, hence, they weren't fully human. When Jesus Christ arrived, he came as fully human, apparently with just 23 X-chromosomes from his mother, and with just one Y-chromosome from God the Holy Spirit. This result in the hypostatic union - the eternal combination between human and divine, hence allowing humans to be redeemed through him. I have even read that St Augustine of Hippo believed and taught that the sinful nature of every human being is inherited from the 23 chromosomes in the father's sperm. Whether that is upheld by science or not, it does make a lot of sense!

The spectre at Newby Church, Yorkshire.

This goes to show the importance of accepting the record of the early chapters of Genesis. The Flood occurred just in time. Had the Messianic Line between Adam and Noah had been invaded by the genes of a fallen angel, even by one generation, then with the line spoilt, Jesus wouldn't be 100% human and thus, unable to save sinful mankind. I have wondered whether one of the real purposes of the Flood, other than to judge the antediluvians, was to preserve the Messianic line from Adam to Christ. After the Flood, there was to be no more mating between fallen angels and human women. And their offspring, discarnate since the Flood, were allowed to roam the Earth and influence mankind to deny the truthfulness of the Gospel.

Paul's belief in such entities had inspired him to write about our defences against these forces which he refers to as the rulers, the authorities, the powers of this dark world, the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms (Ephesians 6:10-18). He then likens our stand against them to that of donning the armour of a Roman soldier, quite likely the one guarding him as he sat in prison.

As for the fallen angels themselves, the Bible gives an answer. Apparently, according to 2 Peter 2:4, they are all confined to a special prison consigned to them, this gloomy darkness is known as Tartarus. It does look as though all the fallen angels are confined there except Lucifer, for only the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ was able to defeat him.

A Facebook Shocker...

This morning I gasped when I saw a poster appear on my laptop screen whilst scrolling down the Facebook wall. It was an advert posted by someone I knew personally. He is to appear this evening on a Channel 4 chat show to talk about his knowledge of recent Middle East history, focusing on the wars and political unrest which had taken place there in the past seventy years.

And I will honestly admit that I have a pinch of envy for him. Appearing on national television. Wow! He even asked us to ignore the football which will be shown concurrently and instead, tune in to his interview on the commercial channel. Does he mean Match of the Day on the BBC, a popular sports programme, especially for male viewers?

Meanwhile, I sit alone at home typing this blog. Alone. For yet again, my beloved wife is in a ward at Frimley Park Hospital. She was taken there by ambulance late last night after spending hours suffering intense pain in her abdomen. Early this morning, news came in. Apparently, she was diagnosed with possible Pancreatitis, a serious illness caused, so I'm told, by the presence of stones in her gall bladder.

In one sense, having a diagnosis is very helpful. Therefore, she will be given the appropriate treatment. Actually, I do recall seeing the presence of a gall bladder stone on an X-Ray image way back in 2007 at John Radcliffe Hospital, after developing unrelated symptoms following the birth of our third daughter. But although the medical staff was aware of the presence of a stone, they decided to ignore it. This might have been due to their assumption that over time it will dissolve into the bile the bladder produces.

Whether this lies behind her health problems, other than her breast cancer, or not, remains to be seen. But here, I would like to highlight a contrast between this fellow on TV and seems to enjoy life to the full, and our own lives of prolonged health anxieties, frequent hospital visits and an uncertain future.

It looks to me that the key to a fulfilled life all comes down to a high education level. The person referred is actually one of a twin. His brother had graduated to be a medical doctor. Also, I have met and spoken to their parents (but had so far, I never met the other sibling.) I wonder how proud this elderly couple were of their son's academic achievements? Their sense of successful upbringing of their twin sons to reach such an academic goal, and thus providing a useful service to their communities - was quite a contrast to the way my own parents felt about me during my teenage years as a slow learner. The resulting boyhood retardation meant that I was one of those 1960s school-leavers who walked into the world of work with absolutely nothing academic to show. Therefore, I have always looked upon a graduate as an icon for a richly fulfilled life and deserving of a higher level of respect from the rest of us.

Yet, despite the slight sense of envy I may feel about his television appearance - and thus a gateway to fame - I wish him well. As a historian, he is also the author of two published books on the Middle East. And that is after cautioning him that specialising in a single overseas location could restrict the numbers of those interested. Unless told specifically otherwise, I will never know whether my word of caution had ever held true or not.

It's this level of education that had made him one of several lay-preachers in our church - this cultural preference presenting a phenomenon I had seen many times before in different churches. For example, the present Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, attended Eton College, followed by gaining a MA at the University of Cambridge, and a BA at the University of Durham. And I once read that Cambridge, in particular, holds a "gene pool" of undergrads from whom the Church of England draws for its future clergy. Rather different from Jesus' selection of his twelve from a more rabble background!

It's this high level of education elevating the student to a higher status in his social life, attaining respect, even admiration from the church elders as well as from the rest of the congregation, along with the rest of the world. Like, during one Summer Sunday morning several years ago, when it was officially announced that a "seminar of Creation" - delivered by this same academic - was to be held that same evening. And I was there to hear the announcement.

And so I attended, only to end up listening to our hero's denial of the historicity of the first chapter of Genesis and reducing the chapter to the level of myth. By mythologising history - that is presenting Scripture as if the events written therein had never occurred - is making ineffective one of the major foundation stones on which the Gospel of Jesus Christ rests. Yes, the same person denying the historic truthfulness of the Bible - appearing on a chat show on TV - whilst at the same time, another person who is a true believer and an advocate for Scriptural truthfulness, carries his cross so heavy and burdensome, that he emotionally breaks as he watches his beloved being carted away to the hospital for the umpteenth time.

As I wrote on my Facebook page, I would be more than willing to jump into his shoes, but would the very thought of jumping into my shoes be a source of terror for anyone? This sense of unfairness - why is one person so blessed, due to his excelling at school, while another has to drag his feet each morning to a monotonous, dead-end and dirty, low-paid job where he also suffers from being bullied by his colleagues? An accurate description of the early days of my work life soon after leaving school. And indeed, quite a good metaphor. While I was experiencing such humiliating conditions around 1970, someone from the Midlands, who I will get to know many years later, had just graduated from University and will be flying off to Africa on a voluntary project. 

The Rev Justin Welby

Could this sense of unfairness and insecurity be behind many cases of domestic abuse? I wonder how many husbands, boyfriends, or partners feel their egos under threat by their partner's level of education, wealth, or professional career? And then develop a controlling streak within the relationship that could end up in a violent assault, even death? And so the Media keeps reporting violent assaults of females in the hands of very insecure and egotistical males. And such could be exacerbated by the annual reports that girls are doing better than boys at school and therefore have a wider career opportunity. And so, a Christless soul moves on before being caught and brought to justice - only to end up behind bars with very low self-esteem that often leads to prison violence.

A Christless soul? Indeed, if my own experience can prove anything, to know God through faith in Jesus Christ is like a picture more worthy than a thousand words, or like the beauty of a face launching a thousand ships. But I need to be real here. There are many occasions when I doubted God, His love or Sovereign power. Or when the chips are down, wondering where God is or which direction our future will take into the unknown.

As one who has been acquainted with the Bible for several decades, our friend's preach posed no threat to my faith. Rather, I stood up to him after the service to defend the historicity of this early chapter of Genesis after dismissing the factual side of the book for his support for science. For example, according to him, how could the Earth possibly exist four days before the rest of the Universe was created, including the Sun, Moon and Stars? It's this rhetoric that brings the atheist to laugh at us as Creationists living in a land of make-believe, instead of facing hard facts of life, that is, believing in Darwin's Evolutionary theories and Charles Lyell's Uniformitarian Geology. 

Too bad I don't have all the answers! Did light exist before the start of Day 1? For God said, "Let there be light" and there was light. And God saw that the light was very good, and He separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day", and the darkness He called "night". And there was evening, and there was morning - the first day - Genesis 1:3-5. Could this be a hint that the Earth was already rotating before the 4th Day of Creation?

But the beauty of the Gospel remains standing on the firm and historic foundation of Genesis. The Fall was indeed an Earth-shaking event, this separation of man from God through sin, and the death of the spirit - that part of him where he communicates freely with God - had done nothing less than erect a barrier consisting of four large stones which had blocked man from God, and unless God acts, man is destined to remain separated from God forever.

Although some Christian leaders might have said that it was God who built the wall, actually, it was the man, Adam, who built it. It was Adam who fell, not God.

The topmost boulder is the character of God - including perfection and holiness.

The next boulder is the debt of sin that cannot be repaid, as God's holiness demands absolute perfection.

The third boulder is slavery to Satan. When Adam ate the forbidden fruit, he sold himself and all his descendants to the Devil, who became "the father of all mankind", according to John 8:43-44.

The fourth block in the wall is spiritual death - the loss of communication with God.

Thus, a very thick barrier exists between a sinful man and God. So strong is that wall, no man can demolish it. No works done by sinful men to earn salvation can knock the barrier down. Our acceptance of Creation and the Fall as historic are absolute necessities to establish this statement of faith. The events surrounding the Fall speaks so clearly of the historicity of the early chapter of Genesis. 

After the Fall, aprons made of sewn fig leaves symbolises man's futile effort to reconcile himself with God. Those leaves were totally ignored by God when He called them to account. The bushes they hid behind is a good illustration of the fourfold barrier now standing between God and man. But God, in His mercy, slays an animal and clothe them - a picture of redemption through the death of an innocent intercessor whose blood was shed to make atonement.

However, eternal redemption was achieved by the Father sending his beloved Son to die in atonement for sin and to bring reconciliation with God, restoring our communication with Him. It's the work of God in its entirety. As the aprons have shown, no man can assist in God's redemption.

By the death of Jesus Christ the Son of God by crucifixion, the wall is demolished in four stages occurring simultaneously: 

God's character ----> Propitiation. The turning away of God's wrath against sin.

The debt of Sin ----> The Certificate of Debt - paid to Infinite Justice by Christ's death.

Slavery to Satan ----> Redemption. Freedom from slavery to sin to that of righteousness.

Spiritual Death ---->Substitutionary Death. Christ died so we might be made alive.

The intricacies between Creation, the Fall, and Redemption forms a triunity of truth that any denial of historic facts cannot find any place in the faith, which, to me, is so glorious to God and vital to my wellbeing. And the wellbeing of all who were at Ascot Life Church on that warm Sunday evening.

I hope our friend's broadcast goes well. Although very patchy in the Facebook advert, I believe it was made to promote his books, which may be flagging in sales.

All the best to him.

England Going Down the Plughole?

We both felt sad when we watched Ambulance on the BBC in the past week. This particular episode featured some cases on mental health. There was one patient, a female teenager, who was hysterical in her bedroom and claiming to see "a brood of snakes" in her room. Later in the programme, this same lady was caught on the parapet of a bridge as if ready to jump off. She was saved by both the Police and the Paramedics.

She explained the main reason behind her hysteria. She was due to take her exams, and she was overwhelmed by her fear of failing, leaving her hopes for her future like that of a boat adrift on the wide ocean, with no land in sight and no clear directions to take. Such is the importance attached to higher education and fulfilling careers.

Her present situation was a far cry from her predecessors. In bygone days, such a young woman was preparing to settle down to married life, to be supported by her breadwinning husband, and herself getting ready to raise children. A typical 1950s home scenario. Indeed, I'm aware that these words I had written could quite likely raise concern among modern, career-minded women, but actually, I'm old enough to remember that during my school days, girls had needlework and housecraft (that is, learning to cook and prepare meals) whilst us boys concentrated on woodwork and metalwork. As far as I remember, back in the mid-sixties, there were no "feminist protests" when such lessons came around, nor any "gender issues" among the boys.

Does anyone remember the Fairy Liquid dishwashing advert on ITV? A child is at home with her mother, who is at the kitchen sink, washing the dishes. The daughter asks a silly question and the mother turns to answer with a big smile across her face. Of course, Daddy is not around. He's at work. The mother then embraces her daughter while the background choir sings the virtues of the product.

And how could I forget the weekday, fifteen-minute Watch with Mother slot? As a young boy, school holidays always featured Andy Pandy and his mate Teddy, Bill & Ben the Flowerpot Men, and the Woodentops - the latter as the ideal English farming family, consisting of the working husband and father, his homely wife and mother of her two cheerful and active children - a brother and sister duet who were never naughty and never in need of discipline. And not to forget their pet dog, a Dalmation who never barked, but made vocal sounds almost akin to talking.

Innocence, pure innocence. In referring to Andy Pandy and Teddy. If this was shown to today's audience, there would be immediate controversy when the two jumped into the same basket hideaway. Both pro- and anti-gay groups would be at loggerheads over the airing of such a scene. Meanwhile, the BBC naturalist David Attenborough would be alarmed at the welfare of the lad if sharing a confined space with a bear cub, notwithstanding the anger shown by the cub's mother-bear for the loss of her offspring.

But it's the title of the whole series that makes up the whole point. Watch with Mother. An ideal, homely lifestyle which, had the mentally ill patient originally anticipated, would most likely not had any emotional distress or strange visions.

A word of caution here. I'm not discouraging women from attending college and making a career for themselves. Rather, all I'm pointing out was one young female suffering mental illness over the possibility of failing her exams. If any male and female student can get ahead in life, good for them. But having an obsession over failure is certainly not healthy! 

As I look out of the window whilst writing this, it's pouring with rain outside. Normally, this doesn't bother me. Especially now that I'm retired from paid outdoor work. But, since August, we have had a leaking roof. However, I only became aware of it after my wife had discovered that rainwater was dripping from the ceiling of our daughter's bedroom. It took another wet day, nearly two months later, to trace the source of the dripping. I eventually found it above our loft and placed a bucket under the appropriate spot. The bucket now catches the dripping, thus reduces further leaks into the bedroom below, and thus also hoping to avoid the development of black mould that could a health hazard.

You may ask: Why not call a private roofer? If the house was our own, then indeed, by now, the roof would have been fixed for a hefty fee. But we're not homeowners but tenants. Therefore, the property belongs to a Housing Association, an offshoot of the local Borough Council, which rents out properties to those who can't afford to take out a mortgage. The scheme is known as Social or Public Housing, which was both essential and very popular across the UK during the 1950s through to the 70s.

Therefore, it's the responsibility of the Association to see to the repair of our roof. Had I hired a private contractor, then I would be paying for the repair of a Council-owned property. Instead, we now have to wait until November before we receive a call. That is three months after making our initial report. 

Why the long wait? That's not too difficult to answer - a shortage of roofers. Whether it was due to Brexit, Covid, or a combination of both, many of these workmen were from Eastern Europe. I recall a few years ago when our landlords insisted we have a total refit of both our kitchen and bathroom. Several contractors were involved - all of them were foreigners, each one of them from the European Union. And they had all done a wonderful job. Our home is much better now than before.

And there was the redevelopment of our town centre. The entire shopping precinct was demolished and a new one was built over the site. It took a couple of years. But whilst I was in town, not only had I spoken to one or two of the workers, but I overheard their talk with one another. They were all mainland Europeans.

And in recent years, many of them had returned to their own countries. Perhaps, this was due to the hostility that was shown towards them after the 2016 referendum Brexit victory. That was enough to discourage them from working any further in the UK, so they packed up and left. After this, the pandemic might have driven more Europeans out of our country.

There's a shortage of roofers in the UK.

The shortage of truckers, roofers, and other key manual workers has demonstrated how necessary to have people carrying out such jobs. They are of great value to all of us. It's through experiences like these that we come to realise that such employees are the very lifeblood of the country - any country, not just ours.

And this morning, as I had my usual cappuccino at Starbucks (annexed to a Sainsbury's superstore.) Once again, there was a long queue of cars, all lining up to use the store's own petrol station. Being such a wet day, I doubted their intention for a day's outing. Rather, they were filling up in readiness for the Monday morning's commute. In the meantime, the Army is being called by the Government to deliver fuel to the pumps. As Remainers blame Brexiteers for the shortage of truckers, Brexiteers blame Covid or the Government's inefficiency, nobody wants to accept blame for both the fuel and food supplies affected.

And so, a universal fear grips the nation. As the media constantly spout out the daily rising Covid infection rates, hospitalisations and Covid-related deaths, people are pondering on the possibility of another lockdown, prolonged social distancing and perpetual mask-wearing - together with rising energy prices, reduced incomes, businesses going bust, empty food shelves, long queues at filling stations - wow! Is England going down the plughole? The whole of Britain, in fact?

I was on one of the Zoom prayer meetings when the host hinted at our reliance on God for the future well-being of ourselves and our nation. Then, while he was discussing this, I thought about the 7,000 Israelite men who had not bowed down to Baal and were therefore kept safe by God, a story that could hold a key to our nation's future health.

Later that day, my PhD friend Andrew invited me to a midweek meeting at the Kerith Centre, the main Baptist church of our hometown of Bracknell. It was during that meeting when I brought up the issue of our nation's critical condition and the story of the 7,000 men.

For those unacquainted with the Bible, perhaps I need to enlighten the story. It's found in 1 Kings 19 in the Old Testament. Here, Elijah had defeated a large group of Baal's prophets, beloved by King Ahab's wife, Queen Jezebel. Furious with rage over the destruction of the prophets, the Queen made a vow to chase down and kill Elijah. In sheer desperation, he flees to a faraway mountain. From the summit, he has an encounter with God.

Feeling bitter and depressed, he pours out his heart to God. After a conversation, finally, God reassures him that he had kept for himself 7,000 men of Israel who had not bowed the knee to Baal, the pagan idol demanding child sacrifice and worshipped by the Royals and the whole of Israel. 7,000 men? Considering that the Hebrews of that time were very family-orientated, and each most likely had several children. If that was taken into the maths, the likelihood of people refusing to bow the knee to Baal could have reached between 30,000 to 40,000 - a small but significant percentage of the Israelite population. I then made a comparison of Elijah's situation with that of Britain.

Britain, and England in particular, is the homeland for Charles Darwin's Theory of Evolution, as he was born and grew up here. His theories took a stronghold in the minds of many until even Christians have shown a form of compromise by accepting theistic evolution. Thus, to believe in Evolution is to deny Divine Creation, hence, calling God a liar and denying His existence. The Theory of Evolution, in a way, can be compared to the idol, Baal. Both were held in high esteem and both hindered worship of God. The main exception is that Evolution does not demand child sacrifice as Baal did. Yet both were robbers of the soul.

Therefore, with the nation forgetting God and denying His existence, will England be sucked into the plughole?

Abraham's intercession for Sodom might answer that question. After the two angels were sent to Sodom, Abraham began to intercede on the city's behalf. Starting with fifty righteous men in the city, he whittled it down to merely ten. Would God destroy the city, even if only ten righteous men are living in it? God's reply was, No, even with just ten righteous men, He wouldn't destroy it (Genesis 18:17-33.)

I am convinced that our country will not go down the plughole, so to speak. As in Elijah's generation, God always keeps for himself a certain number of believers. Each one is kept by the power of God. He could never lose his salvation and be lost again. Each one is the light of the world, the salt of the earth. Even the title Christian, literally mean Little Christ. Although a title of contempt during the Roman era, I think it's an honour now. Little Christ. To be in Christ and Christ in us, with the righteousness of Christ imputed into each believer, God the Father sees each Christian in the same way he sees Jesus - "my beloved son, whom I am well pleased." 

And as long as our Christian presence remains here in this country, indeed, we could suffer a period of economic hardship and poor health one way or another, but as long as we're here, Britain (and all other countries) will survive. In the meantime, it's God's desire that everyone repents (change their minds about our Saviour Jesus Christ) and come to the knowledge of the truth. 

About the female teenager mentioned at the opening of this blog: She had passed her exams, and she's far happier as she is now training to be a nurse.

All the best to her.