3x2 Witnesses In Darwin's Basilica.

The Basilica San Darwin is one location in the UK I have been familiar with since I was a boy. Equally majestic in its interior structure as St Paul's Cathedral, Southwark Cathedral, il Basilica San Pietro, Westminster Cathedral, or even Westminster Abbey, I ask you which of the six basilicas is the odd one out?

Why, it's il Basilica San Pietro, of course! It's at Vatican City in Rome. The other five are all in London.

Indeed, I can classify the Basilica San Darwin, aka the Museum of Natural History, as a religious building, as its imposing Central Gallery, now known as the Hintze Hall, resembling the interior of a cathedral, with stained glass windows at the far end that's characteristic of any large Christian church, and even surrounded by cloisters. On the landing above a flight of stairs stands a white statue of Charles Darwin sitting rather alone and dwarfed to miniaturisation by the immense structure built in his name.

Hintze Hall, Natural History Museum, Stock photo.

The exhibits dominating the Central Hall had changed at least twice since my first visit as a boy (at first with my parents and then with the class of our primary school.) Back then, if my memory hadn't fazed, I recall a circular platform in front of a dominating skeleton of a Diplodocus, on which stood two lifesize elephants on one side, and two rhinos on the other, also lifesize. Then, afterwards, these mammals were moved elsewhere, and the plaster-cast skeleton held dominance, symbolising the entire museum until 2017, when the skeleton was dismantled to begin a tour of the UK, to be replaced by the real bones of Hope, a young Blue Whale.

Talking of primary school children, I actually saw several lines, all young boys and girls under the age of ten in their school uniforms, walking along in pairs with their supervisors. I was quite surprised. I can recall being in a line myself at that same museum, about age ten, and the leading teacher instructed me to read aloud the words on a sign next to one of the exhibits. I responded with, Please Don't Touch. Then the supervisor told the rest of us to heed my instruction. At least, if this is of any comfort to me, I didn't wear a tie at primary, neither did the other children. I also found myself wondering how those kids really feel about having to wear such stiff uniforms whilst all the adults and teenagers around them wore what they liked and felt less rigid and more at ease. However, they all seemed to have been okay with it.

And so, the statue of Charles Robert Darwin sits enthroned in the Hintze Hall, gazing through its entire length to the doors leading out to Cromwell Road. This very man takes the credit for literally revolutionising our minds from accepting the authority of the Bible as a guidebook for daily living to atheistic secularism. Yet, according to a book written by Christian author and Creationist, Jerry Bergman,* Darwin's book, On the Origin of Species, he was accused of plagiarism by his writings being so similar to that of his contemporary, Alfred R. Wallace - not to mention his predecessors Jean Baptiste Lamarck, George Buffon, Robert Chambers, Patrick Matthew - to these authors giving little, if any credit when Darwin wrote On the Origin of Species.

Yet, here am I standing on the third-floor balcony, looking down into the gallery. The bones of Hope, the Blue Whale partly obscuring the comparatively small statue of Charles Darwin, to whom the museum is centred upon. I make my way to the mineral gallery, a collection of specific rocks, meteors, and ores, including a couple of rocks containing jasper.

I was very impressed with the striking beauty of this mineral in its original form. Despite that it was in shadow, the rock still shone in turquoise-blue candescence, as if illuminated from within like a light bulb. I tried to imagine how the stone would have looked had the rays of the sun had shone directly at it.

Jasper. Isn't this mineral mentioned in the Bible? Furthermore, isn't jasper one of the minerals with which the heavenly Jerusalem will be built, the radiance shining with the very glory of God? Jasper, topaz, emerald, gold, sapphire, and other minerals make up its construction. It's while looking down at the exhibits in front of me that I allow my mind to dwell on the afterlife. As the Scripture says, nobody had ever seen the glories that await all who loves God through faith in Jesus Christ. Yet, not only are such glories promised, according to Scripture, God's will is for all men everywhere to have faith in the Atonement made by Jesus Christ on the Cross, his Burial and Resurrection, and eventually have eternal access to this city.**

And the fate of the lost. According to the Bible, everyone who refused to believe in Jesus in this life will still be able to have a glance at this glorious, candescent city and see for themselves the rapturous joy in all its inhabitants. Their source of torment could well come from the eternal question spinning around their heads: Why didn't I believe when I had a whole lifetime of opportunity? Like this, they will no longer be able to blame God. Instead, they will have only themselves to blame.

Two rocks containing jasper, Natural History Museum.

It's amazing how just two rocks containing jasper can be so inspirational, and for the Christian, allow his imagination to run wild. Yet, their radiant beauty, even in its raw uncut state, inspires me. They had also added further confirmation why I have taken the decision to board a train to spend the day at the museum in the first place - to examine some marine fossils, especially one highlighted by one popular YouTuber, ex-Jehovah's Witness Harrison Cother, in his attempts to disprove the historicity of the Bible, especially around the Noachian Deluge.

There were quite a number of both real fossils and plaster-casts of the originals. Therefore, in the Dinosaur gallery, where a model of a Tyrannosaur comes to life via computer tech, in a nearby cabinet there were two fossilised dinosaur eggs. There are examples of fossilised eggs found around the world. Unless eggs hatch, they tend to perish very quickly, often by predators making a meal of them. They simply don't naturally petrify. At least not at such a frequent rate as the fossil record seem to testify.

Walking a little further in the same gallery, I come across a plaster cast of a fossil skeleton Coelophysis. But what's so striking about this fossil was that within its ribcage were the skeletal remains of a small crocodile in the region where the lungs use to be, apparently still on its way to the stomach just below the lungs. Perhaps for the creature to die suddenly immediately after its last meal could have been merely coincidental. Perhaps the meal was poisonous, or it could have asphyxiated the reptile, or the crocodile, still alive, might have bitten through the stomach, killing its eater. Unlikely. The meal looked thoroughly crushed as if well chewed before swallowing. Then how and why did the Coelophysis die so suddenly? 

Coincidental such an incident might have been. Until, a little later on and in the Marine Fossil gallery, I came across what I call "the star fossil" - the very specimen highlighted by the YouTuber. It was very thoughtful for the Museum to display this particular fossil on the lowest tier, as there are others higher up on the wall which is more difficult to examine closely.

The fossil here is the skull of an Ichthyosaur. But this one still had a morsel of food between its jaws when it suddenly died. The morsel apparently was that of a smaller Ichthyosaur. Wondering whether cannibalism was common among this species, earlier that weekend, we watched a David Attenborough documentary on the Puma, and how often an adult male would consume a rival sire's cubs. And this is common among a wide variety of species - a lone male arrives and attacks a rival male's young, then mates with their mother to procreate its own offspring. Was this the case with the Ichthyosaur?

Such interesting thoughts and ideas. And as Darwin looks with a level of eternal seriousness into his own Hintze Hall towards the entrance doors, beyond those doors the world beats, the traffic moves through the street outside, regulated by traffic lights - red, amber, green. Pedestrians minding their own business. Some are in a hurry, so they stride at a fast pace to get to where they need to go. Others are far more casual, strolling along, chatting lightly, laughing at a joke, all taking advantage of the balmy Spring weather where there's hardly a cloud in the sky. The outside seating at cafes and coffee houses filled with happy-go-lucky people enjoying the good weather to the full, with not a moment's thought of the elderly gentleman sitting eternally inside the museum.

And yet it was mainly he who had influenced their thinking, accepting evolution as a scientific fact and relegating the Bible as legend and myth. Even a student says to his fellow student companion whilst sitting outside at a coffee table, reminding him that Charles Darwin is the central figure of the Natural history Museum. But his friend is one of the very few students who are fully aware that Darwin is not the real father of evolution, contrary to the thinking of the majority, but has plagiarised the writings of his contemporary, Alfred Wallace, who also believed in macro-evolution even before Darwin wrote his famous book. 

Who would have ever thought that while the statue of Charles Darwin attempts to dominate the interior - even if back then, Dippy the Diplodocus and at present, Hope, the Blue Whale now have the greater dominion. Yet, like in any religious building, visitors bow to honour the statue, believing how wonderfully clever and intelligent the man was when alive, Just as Jesus was, so some of them may think, in his day. 

Skull of Ichthyosaur with food in its jaws.

But this week, I have seen three sets of witnesses, two of each, to disprove the very man the museum is dedicated to. They were, 

1. The two rocks containing the precious mineral Jasper.

2. The two fossilised Dinosaur eggs.

3. The two fossil skeletons of preditors who died suddenly during or immediately after eating.

Maybe these three, especially the two fossils, don't sit well with Darwin's macro-evolutionary theories. Rather, they may indicate a sudden worldwide catastrophe, such as the Noachian Deluge. If so, then the day out was to verify the truthfulness of the Bible, and not to disprove it as Darwin intended. 

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

*Jerry Bergman, The Dark Side of Charles Darwin, 2011, 2017, Master Books.

**Revelation, chapters 21-22.

A Future Chat With the Pharmacist.

Alex looked concerned as she checked her prescription supply.

Alex: Sweetheart, can you pop down to the surgery and order another supply of Diazepam and Baclofen?

Frank: Okay no problem. As a matter of fact, my Warfarin is running low too. I have only four day's supply left. It's time to top up. How much do you still have left?

Alex: (counting) I would say four or five days.

Frank: Okay. I'll be back shortly.

As I walk merrily down the tree-lined path into the woods which makes up a corner of South Hill Park, I ponder on how fortunate as a nation to have the National Health Service. Being a short walk, I decided to leave the bicycle behind. By walking, I can look around our unspoilt environment and thank the Lord for his sustained Creation, as well as thanking him for allowing me to see another day in human history.

I approach our local NHS surgery. Ordering prescribed medicine is a simple task. Just tick the boxes printed next to each drug listed on the form, which came with the last prescription, and then to post it through into the renewal box fixed for the purpose next to the Prescription Enquiries window.

As I approached, I began to feel alarmed at the empty car park, which was never free from the four or five cars which were parked there during office hours. As I approached the main entrance, I was suddenly paralysed with shock! I continued to stare at the notice fixed to the glass-panelled door from the inside, which read:
DUE TO PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES, THIS SURGERY WILL REMAIN CLOSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.

Further notice? What "Further notice?" It could be just for a few hours or days. But equally, it could be for weeks, months, years.

I was gripped by cold, naked fear. I broke into a cold sweat and even felt my long hair attempting to stand on end. How on earth are we to renew our prescriptions? Especially with my wife's Diazepam? With her neurotic disorder, without this vital drug, she can go into involuntary fits of muscle spasm, a convulsion of her body which cannot be controlled by the conscious mind. Her daily dose of the medicine keeps her from having such fits and therefore able to lead a normal life.

Quickly and panic-stricken, I make my way to the Drugstore, just less than 150 metres from the surgery. I then asked the Pharmacist what's on earth is going on. She then explained the current crisis of the NHS. Ever since the Tories had regained power at 10 Downing Street back in December of 2019, as well as leaving the European Union soon afterwards, there has first been a trickle of staff deserting the NHS, followed by a flood of those leaving to return to their home countries. She also explained that a large proportion of the Doctors, Consultants and Nurses were from Europe and India, the latter renowned for its children's ambition to qualify as Doctors through dedication to study hard at school and college, without such distractions such as television, play stations, football team support or pop music.

What? I asked. Isn't there a gene pool right here in England for training qualified NHS staff?

Not according to statistics, was her reply. But equally distressing, according to this Pharmacist, was the strangulation of medical supplies, especially from Europe, where a large proportion is made and shipped. Being outside the European Union, such supplies have now to pass through custom and tariff legislation. With such shipping held up and delayed, along with border tariffs, the price of medicine had to rise.

I responded that I'm not too worried about that, for Alex has a pre-paid certificate and since I'm over 65, I qualify for Senior Citizen's State-funded medical supply.

The Pharmacist gave me a rather drawn-out look, then reassured me that she now has the authority to sign for the medicine in place of the Doctor. What a huge relief! When I told her that we need our prescription renewed right away, she took the forms from me and with her fellow staff members, proceeded to prepare the medicines which we both require. About twenty minutes later she appeared holding two packets.

Disturbingly, she began to jab at her calculator.

That will be ninety pounds, please.

WHA-A-A-T!!! I cried. My wife has a pre-paid Certificate and I'm a pensioner. What's going on?

Pharmacist: You should know by now that since recently, the NHS had imploded on itself, it no longer exists. With that, pre-paid certificates are now invalid and every senior citizen has to pay now as well. Look, you asked for three packets of Warfarin, one of Losartan, one of Spironolactone, one of Bisoprolol, and one of Bumetanide. At ten pounds each, that would be seventy pounds. Then your wife wanted Diazepam and Baclofen, adding a further twenty pounds. That totals ninety.

Frank: My wife did not ask for Antidepressants, Oramorph, Co-Codamol, Senna or Laxido, at least not this time. If she had, then the whole shenanigan would cost us both 140 pounds! That's more than the 110 pounds she spent to buy her pre-paid certificate valid for a whole year. 

Pharmacist: I'm very sorry things turned out this way. But our NHS has been on its breaking point for the last several years. Sooner or later something had to give. Hence the closure of all our GP surgeries.

As I left the Drugstore feeling crushed and out of pocket, I was wondering how on earth are we going to manage all this. Fortunately, my Pension income is healthy, we should be able to pull through - just, without the need to tighten our belts too much, although it may mean saying goodbye to taking breaks away, whether it's in the UK or abroad. Or as long as we don't fall ill in need of hospitalisation. Just by calling 999 may itself cost us more than a hundred pounds.

On the walk home, I decided to take a longer route, so I can mull on my thoughts.

"Fear coursing through my whole being. Fear? That's an understatement. It was more like terror - frightened of the future. I guess it goes back to December 2019, the month of our last election. Boris Johnson leading the Conservative Party back into power, hence a majority Government back into Parliament. His new Cabinet also included Jacob Rees-Mogg as Chancellor and Nigel Farage as Health Minister.

"Nigel Farage, the leader of the Brexit Party? Once, yes. But not any more. The Press, especially the Daily Mail newspaper, advised his followers not to vote for a Brexit Party candidate, in case the Brexit issue was split and divided enough to let Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party into power. The result was that the Brexit Party polled so badly - it folded up, leaving its leader to reconcile himself with Johnson and joined the Tories. The Prime Minister saw Farage as a fit enough candidate for Health Secretary.

"How the Media had demonised Jeremy Corbyn! Nicknamed Jezza by the Daily Mail, his "extreme left-wing" manifesto was reputed to have terrified the middle-classes and the high earners into paying higher taxes. By contrast, the newspapers poured endless praise on the Tory Party. With the promise of "getting Brexit done" along for lower taxes for higher earners, Johnson also promised to pour "billions" into the NHS - but following Brexit, there has been a rapid rise of racial and xenophobic threats, with white, English patients throwing insults at foreign Consultants and Nurses, causing them to leave their profession to return to their home countries, along with being bogged down with the catch 22 situation. The more hours they put in, the more taxes they pay and their pension savings robbed.

"I wonder whether I must take a share of the blame. I did not vote for Corbyn's Labour Party in the last election and it was not because I was opposed to some of his principles, but because of his antisemitic stance, or at least reputed to favour the Arabs, including the Hamas, above the Jews. I can't be dogmatic about this, but if true, then I'm convinced that his lack of popularity with the electorate was spawned by his disregard for the Jews and for Israel's right to exist. It seems so ironic. Antisemitism was always the dogma for the far-right. Therefore what was it doing lurking among the Left? Especially when British political history has demonstrated that the Jews were always favoured by Labour, and in all past elections, the Jewish community had played a vital role in putting Labour into power. By contrast, for a long time, the Conservatives had a level of contempt for the Jewish community, and thus, failed to win their vote."

As I kept on walking, the Hilton Hotel came into view, giving me more time to keep pondering.

"As for this present Tory Government, their policy to restrict immigration to a points system which allowed only the most skilled workers into the UK has made me ponder: Does our PM really favour the better educated? Does he want only the professional to enter the UK permanently? Therefore for the plebs to stay out, they're not wanted? Hmm. This seems to have a smattering of eugenics. And what a surprise! Eugenics had its origins here, right here in England, of all places, and by two white, well-educated Englishmen - Charles Darwin and Francis Galton, Darwin's cousin.

Charles Darwin, the real father of eugenics.

"And the return of Dickensian England, so it seems. Charles Dickens wrote A Christmas Carol, a book which featured the young son of a poor family who was left to die of a curable illness while those who were wealthy enough to pay for treatment received it. As the family stood around the grave, watching their son's small coffin being lowered into the ground, who would ever think that it will be a Labour Prime Minister, Clement Atlee, would dream up the NHS centuries later. But by then, for that family, it's a little too late."

I pause to look around as I drew close to my home. Almost there.

"Perhaps it didn't take much of an imagination for Darwin to dream up his evolutionary theories or for his cousin to invent the idea of eugenics. Really, eugenics was already in action for centuries earlier - of some sort. Instead of Hitler's henchmen using it to usher in the Holocaust, it was Mammon which decided who was fit enough to survive, and those who were unfit (that is, the poor) who were left to die of illness. However, this was not Evolution - the development of higher organisms over generations - but man-made Natural Selection through wealth, the elimination of the weak."

I arrived home, dumped the medicine on a nearby table and told my beloved everything that has happened. Then I broke down into tears and wept copiously. While in her arms, she encouraged me to have faith in God, because he knows exactly what situation we're in, our state of health and how the three of us - God, Alex and I will deal together with it like a threefold cord.

Slowly I came to. She is right of course. Having faith in God is the only real solution to all of life's problems.

Simon Reeve's Longing for God...

I guess that most of us - Christian or non-Christian - have a celebrity to admire, to hold in awe, whether it would be a professional footballer or any other sportsman, a singer, an actor, or even a politician. Or a journalist or more appropriately, a presenter of a popular documentary, especially one who has TV fame. For example, I know at least two regular church-going Christians who admire Conservative politician Jacob Rees-Mogg, and there could be others, churchgoers or not, who keep their adoration for such a posh, Eton-educated politician secretly in their closets. As for TV presenters, I believe BBC naturalist David Attenborough is loved universally by the nation, while news anchor and Antiques Roadshow presenter Fiona Bruce may be admired more by men.

It's more about TV journalists that I wish to focus on here. Three immediately come to mind - the first two having university degrees: News Correspondent Andrew Marr and Professor Brian Cox. The third is Travel Presenter Simon Reeve. As for Andrew Marr, to watch him shed his business suit and tie and then see him walk through a tropical rainforest wearing an open-neck shirt - I then realise he must be human after all - yet I can't help but shake my head at his lifetime devotion and awe for Charles Darwin as the greatest Briton who ever lived.

Both photos - Andrew Marr in Darwin's Dangerous Theory.

According to his own admission, Andrew Marr is an atheist. To him, God does not exist, and he remains determined to stay that way. But Professor Brian Cox is more of an agnostic. He acknowledges the possibility that God might exist. Both Andrew Marr and Brian Cox have university alumni, the former with an honourable degree from Trinity Hall, Cambridge, while the other achieved a doctorate at the University of Manchester. I'm aware that Marr attended church as a boy, and whether Cox had attended church during his boyhood is not known, although he most likely has been taught the rudimentary issues of the Christian faith while attending Hulme Grammar School.

But it is Simon Reeve who I wish to focus on here. Although both Marr and Cox have aroused a level of admiration within me, their road to broadcasting fame was the traditional route through either Grammar or Public School eg, Eton or Harrow, followed by Uni. And normally, that is the route taken by nearly all TV journalists and presenters. But not Simon Reeve.

If there was a celebrity who has won my all-time admiration, it has to be Simon Reeve. Looking through Google images of Reeve, it's rather difficult to come across a snapshot of him wearing a tie or even a bow-tie, as was the case with both Marr and Cox. And that is reflected in his travel documentaries. Sporting a permanent stubble, his casual dress would have earned the description of "scruffy" by more posh or well-to-do gentlemen. He normally wears open-neck shirt and at times, a crew-neck tee-shirt, as he delivers his expert political and economic issues of the country he's visiting, as well as its natural and environmental beauty, together with having intimate communication with the indigenous residents of a shanty town or a forest hut and accepting a bed there for the night.

This, along with his experienced diving skills which allow him to film magnificent coral reefs and other marine and aquatic life, thus enhancing his programmes. His style of presentation has made some, including myself, to dub him as "just another ex-public schoolboy". It is also reputed that Simon Reeve was mistaken for Professor Brian Cox. But his style of presentation had bid me check up on his background, and I was surprised with what came up.

Both pics: Simon Reeve out on his travels.

As a boy, like Andrew Marr, he also attended church, but in Reeve's case, he grew up in a Methodist environment. Also as a youth, there were times when he clashed with his father, so I read, and he was known for being mischievous, including shoplifting, I assume, stealing confectionary and running out of the shop without paying. He attended a comprehensive school and left with minimal qualifications. He didn't go to university. Instead, after leaving school, he took on several jobs until he landed one as a poster boy with a newspaper. During his time there, he studied Arab history and wrote a book on the subject which was published but failed to sell well - that is, until the 9/11 bombing of the World Trade Center. After this, various companies contacted him about his book which eventually opened a door at the BBC as a travel presenter.

His knowledge of world current affairs along with his geography has always astonished me, I think, his stubble and casual dress enhancing my sense of awe. It is easy for me to feel a level of envy. Although in all appearances he comes over as a casual, free-going backpacker who can just knock on a door and immediately offered food and a bed for the night, it's easy to forget that he has a TV crew with him, and the hospitality shown must have been after weeks of planning. In other words, on TV, his travels look just like my own travel habits - walking to a hotel from the street and asking for a bed for the night or several nights and offered a room. But that was done on my own. No TV crews accompanying me.

And the way Simon drives his car during a shoot. Whilst doing so, he turns to talk into the camera which is set up behind him. Surely, this kind of distraction is illegal here in the UK. But I have noticed that we never have a glance at the passenger seat, which gives the impression that he is alone in the vehicle and has full control of it. But it has crossed my mind whether the car he drives is a dual-drive, as in cars used in driving schools. The camera is always placed at an angle so never to see the guy sitting next to him.

And then at one point, he makes a three-part documentary about pilgrimage, going back to the Middle Ages as well as talking to modern day pilgrims. His journey began at Lindisfarne here in Britain's northeastern coast, all the way to Jerusalem, stopping at Spain's Santiago as well as crossing the Alps to reach Rome. It was while he was still in the UK, on the Watling Street route east of London and on the way to Dover, where Simon's true character was revealed.

One of Reeve's strengths is that he shuns the stiff upper lip and is prepared to show his emotions. That is another reason why I hold him in awe. He's not afraid to be emotional. At this ancient Roman road, he met up with this pilgrim who was carrying a cross of Christ, and with it on his shoulders, walked great distances both here in the UK and abroad. During the interview, I could see his emotions rise, and Simon was close to tears. Then he uttered these words to the camera which inspired the writing of this blog. They were:

Oh, how I envy his faith!

It was as if through this simple statement the veil fell. He was close to tears. Suddenly I understood.

He has a longing for faith in God, but not for his perception of God he grew up with. I can actually say that all three of us share a common childhood factor. Andrew Marr attended a church in Scotland, the land of his birth. Referring to himself as an "irreligious Calvinist", he gives me the impression that the church he attended as a boy was Scottish Presbyterian. But whatever impression he ever had of God, I'm pretty sure that he perceived him as punitive and judgemental rather than a loving Saviour. And if I understand Simon Reeve's Methodism correctly, a repentant sinner is saved straight away, but this forfeitable salvation is conditioned on human choice and is seen as probational for continual faithfulness and holy living rather than a free gift of grace bestowed on the wicked. Being aware of areas in his life which does not meet such godly criteria, it would not be surprising that he eventually became disillusioned with the whole religious thing.

And that's why I can identify with them. I grew up as a Roman Catholic, which catechism is about a works-based soteriology. That is, salvation can only be attained after a life of confession of sin to a priest, doing penance, attend Mass every Sunday and holy days, partaking in the Eucharist, and staying faithful throughout life. If I was unfortunate to die with unconfessed mortal sin in my soul, then it's Hell for all eternity, even after decades of holy and faithful living! Little wonder that in my teenage years I hated God! And I know of other former Catholics who lived lives in hatred of anything religious.

Tying it all together, I can understand Simon Reeve's envy of the cross-carrying pilgrim. As he sees him, his constant faithfulness and actually enjoying his work to secure his salvation, and the pilgrim's ability to prove his love for God and to remain spotless from the world, Reeve is convinced that the holy man has earned the love of God and is destined for eternal heavenly bliss.

Simon Reeve perceives a God who keeps looking at his sin, his failures and his weakness instead of wallowing in God's love whose Son died and was resurrected so God can justify the wicked freely, simply by believing in the heart that God has raised Christ from the dead, without the need for works. That was how I once perceived God to be, as Simon does, as Andrew Marr does, as Brian Cox does - the need to work for salvation and knowing I'll never make it. With that kind of worldview so prevalent, it does look as if we as a church is not getting the message of God's love across adequately enough.

Also, I might add: All three presenters believe in Evolution. Because this theory concocted by Charles Darwin literally destroys the credibility of the Gospel, then why believe in a punitive and ever watching God? To them, science has proved that life is far better without him.

Brian Cox at the Grand Canyon. Simon Reeve lookalike?

There is something about being on a pilgrimage. The belief that going on long journeys on foot, encountering dangers, a risk to life, weariness, pain, all this cleaning the soul from sin and opens the path to Heaven. The trouble with that is, it's salvation by works, the work being on this long journey, a journey which only a few can accomplish, and the likes of Simon Reeve, such a journey is beyond his means and therefore, holding on to a false idea that Heaven too, is beyond his reach.

Poor Simon! He stands there looking into the TV camera, his face screws as if about to cry. Very close to tears, he looks with envy at the pilgrim as he walks on towards Dover, the Cross of Christ on his shoulders, pacing his way to Heaven, and admitting his jealousy at the man's faith as he compares with his own need for God his childhood experience was unable to fulfil.

Almanac - A Return to Conscription.

Following what I have written last week, A Whiff of Hypocrisy, I thought for this week to write a tongue-in-cheek almanack on what could happen after March 29, 2019 - the day the UK leaves the EU.

Imagine accidentally dropping a china plate. When it hits the hard floor, often it breaks into half a dozen or so wedges rather than shatter into a thousand fragments as with the case of glass, such as an empty bottle or jam jar. But the area of impact between plate and floor is a small area indeed, yet in an instant, a crack shoots across the plate, diverting dendroid-like until each fragment separates and fly across the floor in different directions.   

Brexit day had that effect on the European Union. From the day the UK left the EU, a massive political earthquake so severe shook the European block that the Union itself was drastically weakened. Two countries suddenly decided to leave, Hungary and Italy. This was followed by Austria, along with the Czech and Slovak Republics. Unlike with Britain, there was no messy political turmoil and confusion stretching to nearly three years since the 2016 Referendum. Instead, when these countries held their polls, and the majority wanted out, these Governments put their people's vote into action straight away, each leaving the EU after just a few weeks after polling day. 

Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany, had weakened to the extent that her position was under threat. Therefore, to preserve any remnants of the EU, she formed an alliance with French President Emmanuel Macron. Meanwhile, Spain gets into a huff with Britain over the destiny of Gibraltar, as this tiny territory has left the EU with the UK. Therefore this major Iberian Penninsula nation forms a stronger alliance with France and Germany. However, the Greek economy remains so weak that it decides to ditch the Euro currency for its original Drachma, just as Italy has brought back its Lira, Austria its Schilling, and the original Koruna became the currency for both the Czech and Slovak Republics. With its restored Drachma, Greece also drops out of the EU, although with the blessing of Germany, Spain and France.

Back in post-Brexit Britain, Theresa May, having fulfilled her duty, stands down as Prime Minister, leaving a vacancy which triggers a leadership contest. Candidates such as Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Jacob Rees-Mogg, among others, all threw their names into the hat. But with both Johnson and Rees-Mogg having attended Eton, the contest was eventually whittled down to those two. However, because Rees-Mogg has an ongoing experience of being head of the European Research Group, he was already acquainted with leadership, along with his characteristic formal off-duty dress and stiff upper lip, he was voted in as leader of the Conservative Party, which remains in power, making Rees-Mogg the new Prime Minister. Odd, coming to think of it, but the party seemed to have forgotten that Johnson was once Mayor of London. Or was it because he lost to Sadiq Khan in May 2016, which the Tories consider something of a tragedy?

In turn, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and her Christian Democratic Union Party fell out of power due to increasing lack of popularity and a strong swing in favour of the Far Right neo-Nazis. Its chairman, Jorg Meuthen, becomes Head of State, and quickly breaks his alliance with France, and leaving what remains of the EU. Bent on National supremacy, not only does he want his country to be populated only by his Aryan race, but also has in mind to reintroduce eugenics into his manifesto, and turns to German universities, looking for post-graduates, particularly in the medical field, to staff his Cabinet.

It is a revival of the set of concepts which blossomed into the WWII Holocaust. To this leader, Darwin's Evolution is a basic truth further developed towards the human social sphere by Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton. The extermination of "weaker" races of mankind, which is the whole purpose of Natural Selection given a boost by human activity, therefore everyone who does not match the ideal Ayran model of humanity will be either killed, sent to lifelong hard labour, or be forcibly sterilised.  

Included in Germany's political manifesto is a bill which makes Christianity a criminal offence, and with it, the closing down of all churches, including Roman Catholic. Any belief in the Gospel of Jesus Christ must include a literal six-day Divine Creation recorded in Genesis, the cornerstone for the rest of the Bible. This Scriptural record would shatter Darwin's evolutionary theories to a thousand pieces, therefore making it totally irredeemable. The German neo-Nazis know this well enough. Therefore, by criminalising the Christian faith, along with the historicity of the Bible, will justify their concept of Darwinism and its nationalistic and eugenic offsprings.

All German churches close down like this one in Cuba.

Meanwhile, in London, Rees-Mogg had to bow to circumstances. Due to massive traffic congestions on the motorway leading to Dover, as well as a dangerously low level of vital medical supplies and the importation of other goods into the UK, the Prime Minister had no other option but to sign a new deal with the much-weakened Brussels for a Customs agreement. Although the EU is only a fragment of what it used to be, such signing of the agreement opened the door for such congestions to clear up and just as important, allow European immigrants into the UK to fill large swaths of medical staff vacancies which posed a very definite danger for every patient.

Rees-Mogg's stoicism, his stiff upper lip, and his plumb upper-class accent, as well as his constant smartness despite hot summer weather, has given everyone around him a sense of confidence, maybe even a sense of smug self-satisfaction. However, it's his stoicism which is hiding a very deep fear, maybe to the point of feeling terrified. And that is the rise of neo-Nazism in Germany, also no longer in the EU.

The new Fatherland's philosophy of Governance by means of national supremacy involving eugenics matches that of Adolf Hitler's in the 1930s, and our PM cannot help feeling that a war with Germany is becoming more and more likely with each passing day. So he consulted with the Ministry of Defence, and after long talks, all agreed that with such a scenario, the only way forward is to bring back compulsory Conscription, that is National Service for all males aged 18 and above, a making of a comeback after it was done away with since the start of 1962.

After the announcement was broadcast in all the Media, emotions ran high. There were some who relished the idea of the military. Oddly enough, it may not be so much for Queen and Country as for a sense of adventure along with plenty of camaraderie and comradeship among those under the umbrella of warfare. Such imagination looks far more exciting than the dreary day-to-day being stuck in traffic for a life of drudgery in the office. 

Then there are those at the other end of the thought spectrum, those who are terrified of the prospect of losing their comfortable existence enjoyed and taken for granted for past decades. Labelled as "snowflakes", they will do anything to acquire the status of a Conscientious Objector. They will also feel envious and rage towards the Baby-Boomer generation, nearly all having retired from full-time work and having never seen the inside of the barracks, therefore automatically exempt from the call-up.

Among those, there is the third group, probably the largest of the three. They are the ones who see the impending war as a nuisance, but for Queen and Country, they enrol without much of a fuss, and merely take such an inconvenience in their stride. After all, it's all that life is all about. 

Although there will be some years before the war with Germany will finally break out, the culture of the land is seen as changing post-Brexit. Despite the screaming objections uttered by the feminists, women are first discouraged, then forbidden to be on the battle front line, and are confined to administrative jobs. Also among the keener conscripts, a growing sense of patriotism is developing in their minds. But with this, also a sense of xenophobia, racism and homophobia. Conscripts who were thought to be gay were often enticed behind the sheds, away from any supervision, and beaten up. The same is also happening to non-whites. In addition, "snowflakes" are also victims of a severe beating behind the sheds, their whinging and apparent lack of physical prowess being a major source of weakness, so it is thought, on the battlefront. 

Across the country, a resurgence of boxing clubs is appearing at most if not all leisure centres, aiming particularly at teenagers prior to conscription. Also in this sport, females are discouraged as young males are drawn in, uttering wails of protest from the fairer gender. Once again the sport of boxing will evolve to be an exclusively male activity.  

Pride in traditional British culture is also resurfacing. And the most obvious of this is the revival of the neck-tie. Over the years, I have seen a gradual decline of this strip of cloth worn around the collared shirt. That includes many City workers, general office management and staff, medical staff, TV news reporters and scientists. As the tie nears to the point of being confined to weddings and the school uniform, now post-Brexit, it's enjoying a resurgence. As a result, the good old Tie-Rack store is reopening in all towns, and tailors such as Burton's are also making a comeback. Alongside this, landlords are becoming more racist and xenophobic, with black and Asian applicants for tenancy, along with Eastern Europeans, are all refused accommodation.

Many employers fire their non-white staff with an order to "go back to their own country" - despite many having been born here. But many other businesses are forced to shut down because most Eastern Europeans, who have sustained such businesses, have already returned home. Therefore with no indigenous Brit keen to take on such low-paid menial jobs, the Economy now has to rely entirely on imports - hence Rees-Mogg's need for the signing of the Customs agreement.

There is a national sense of returning to the 1950s. Compulsory conscription, boys learning to be boys, having a rough-up in the street instead of a constant fixation to their computer and tablet screens. In churches, this crazy idea of hugging each other ceases, even among the most charismatics, and the stoic, stiff upper lip is revived, especially among the men. 

A schoolboy, taken in 1950. Now he's well into his seventies.

At number 10, Jacob Rees Mogg is expecting Germany to declare war any time now. He knows that this war is a contest for national and world supremacy. The working of natural selection and the struggle for existence. The concept thought of by ardent atheist Jean Baptiste Lamarck, Charles Lyell, then by Charles Darwin and modified by Francis Galton. A race to godhood, so it seems, as was the false promise made in the Garden of Eden, and Brexit was a good launch-pad towards national supremacy, or to see it another way, a redirector, after being an EU member causing the Social Natural Selection to tire somewhat in its progress.

Germany, who sees the UK as a direct rival in the race for world supremacy, declares war! But after an intermediate period for Britain to surrender, and Jacob Rees-Mogg's refusal to give in to the Germans, Germany launches its main weapon, a nuclear warhead. As it plunges into central England, the resulting mushroom cloud annihilates a very large percentage of the population... 

                                                                          ***
Based on what I have read a Creationist worldview on Hitler and his Nazi reign, I cannot say that these things would never happen. There is a chance that it could. Fortunately, we have a God who created everything in just six days, whose breath of life are through our nostrils, and whose future lay entirely in his hands. And in his love and redemptive powers, I can rest my case, always trusting in him. 

Dust, Ashes, Loyalty, and Treachery.

Why are we here? I was once told that there have always been highly trained philosophers throughout history who were never able to answer that question. In a quest to leave religion out of the debate, one fellow had taken a look at a cliff-face of stratified rock layers, often containing fossils of long-dead organisms, and came up with the theory of Uniformitarianism. I know, it's one heck of a long word - and typing it in here may give an impression of being a graduate. However, the person referred was Scottish geologist Charles Lyell, who in 1837 published his book, Principles of Geology. In a nutshell, it was about his theory that the rock strata were laid down very slowly by water over millions of years.

Charles Darwin, after sailing around the world in The Beagle, finally arrived at the Galapagos Islands in the Pacific, and from observing the wildlife thriving on these volcanic peaks, and taking into consideration Lyell's book, in 1859 he published his more famous book, On the Origins of  Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, normally known simply as On the Origin of Species. It was the book which changed the world and liberated society from "the horrible shackles of religion" which included giving an account to a God in heaven.

Charles Darwin

Darwin changing the world? I would go as far to say that what he had written and published has caused a hypothetical earthquake which ripples could be felt today. And the ripples, rather than fading away as in a physical quake, these are constantly intensifying, right to the point where not only the earth is shaking but the heavens too.

Strange really, on how such a book could have an effect, both directly and indirectly, upon the lives of millions. As mentioned in previous blogs, Hitler's henchmen, academics such as Dr Josef Mengele, Dr Joseph Goebbels, Dr Alfred Rosenberg and Reinhard Heydrich were all former Roman Catholics - until they entered university and became more aware of the theory of evolution by means of Natural Selection being far more "in tune with reality" than their religious faith could ever offer, and all renounced their former religion, embraced Darwinism, and allowing this to be their mindset to get behind Hitler to launch the Holocaust.*

There is something about the university as a recognised institution. It was successful in transforming former Catholics into atheists, any beliefs in Creationism into Darwin's evolution, from being potential medical carers to mass killers. Furthermore, the university seems to have the ability to transform a man into believing he is a god. Not only is this accumulation of knowledge raises the student's status towards supposed divinity, but verifies the Edenic Lie to be fully historic.

Sure enough, there are talking animals recorded in the Bible. The serpent, or snake, was one of them. It was it which made Eve reconsider God's motive in not allowing them to eat of a certain tree in the garden and then promising divinity just by eating of its fruit (Genesis 3:1-7). Then there was the case of a talking donkey ridden by the prophet Balaam, recorded in Numbers chapter 22. The prophet was so engrossed with the king's reward to curse the young nation of Israel, that an angel, invisible to the prophet, stood in front while Balaam urged the donkey on. Then in exasperation, the donkey spoke human words. What astonishes me was that Balaam took all this in his stride, as if it was an everyday occurrence, without any hint of shock or surprise! I wonder how a present-day jockey, competing at Ascot Racecourse, would react if his horse told him in plain English to ease up?

To the secularist, such divine breaches to the natural order have made the whole Bible disbelievable and far from reality. And I guess this includes the story of the Tower of Babel, recorded in Genesis 11:1-9. Here, after a few generations, the descendants of Noah grew into quite a sizable community. Although meant to spread across the Earth by God's command, instead they deliberately disobeyed, preferring to confirm their status as gods by building a city and tower "to reach unto heaven". Their pride and ambition to climb the ladder of divinity, in this case literally, was so intense, that God himself had to intervene. Indeed, the snake spoke to them at Babel, and keeps on speaking, saying the same sort of things to us, right up to this day.

And from this divided community arose one man, Abraham. Married for many years to his beautiful wife Sarah, but remaining childless, this man knew his own worth before God. He was so different from his contemporaries. Instead of thinking he could make himself divine through hard work and in trusting natural selection to raise his descendants to godhood, he thought of himself as just dust and ashes, as recorded in Genesis 18:27-28.

Abraham had a very healthy perception of himself. Because to think of himself no more than dust and ashes was an acknowledgement for the need of a Saviour. And that is why we are here. To know God, our Creator, and a Saviour to save us from our godhood-obsessed sinful natures. And that is how I want to think myself as - dust and ashes by nature, yet regenerated and transformed into a son of God, to be "a little Christ" (the correct meaning of the word Christian), and to spend all eternity in God's presence. And hand-in-hand with this is to acknowledge that every person born is the very image of God, regardless of skin colour, nationality, religion, occupation or wealth.

Creationism recognises that every person is made in the image of God. Evolution discriminates against the weak and favouring the strong and the fit in the struggle for life, allowing the weak and the unfit to perish through extinction. And that can apply to race and nationalism, too.

Charles Darwin himself acknowledged this. He actually believed that the English were the superior race, more advanced in the evolutionary scale than all other nations. His cousin, Englishman Francis Galton, redirected Darwin's evolutionary theory from general biology to social evolution, something still sticking to us up to the present.

Tower of Babel.

And so this passing week, where social evolution seems to be the underlying motive involving loyalty against treachery in the political world here in the UK. It was all about Brexit, and after months of failed negotiations with Brussels, at last, our Prime Minister, Theresa May, has come up with a deal which if passed by both Brussels and Parliament, will keep the United Kingdom united and at the same time, keep the border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic open, without a physical barrier, which was removed after the signing of the Good Friday Agreement on 10th April 1998. The deal includes the restriction on people movement - the main sticking point of the 2016 Referendum - as well as better fishing rights and freedom from the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. But the issue also involves remaining in the single market for tariff-free and borderless trading.

For example, much of our necessary medicines are manufactured in the EU and shipped here in the UK. If May's deal is passed, any threat to our medicine supply will most likely be lifted, and our supplies should continue as they always have. But if the deal falls through, and that can still happen, then it's either a No-deal Brexit, which could see our medicine supply, for example, restricted or even cut off - or no Brexit at all, therefore remaining in the EU (wishful thinking!). This is really important to us, as both my wife and I are dependent on a regular supply, in my case, for life.

Theresa May admits that her deal is far from perfect, but it is the best on offer. She spent months working hard at it, to bring it to an agreement with Brussels. When a draft agreement was made, immediately a number of Tory MP's started to write letters to the Party Chairman for the Prime Minister to be given the vote of no confidence, in other words, to oust her out from power.

One of the leading "hard-Brexiteers" who was to write such a letter was Jacob Rees-Mogg, sometimes known as the Englishman's darling. Despite May's hard efforts over the months to knock out a deal, in him, we see treachery in its worst form - campaigning to have the Prime Minister kicked out of power while she is in a vulnerable position. 

For the benefit of those who are regular readers of my blogs, I have made known my disagreements with the Conservative Party. For example, I have always been against any form of privatisation of the NHS, I was never keen on big business making big profits at the expense of its workers and its customers, I never had any time for rich, idle aristocrats or posh people, I have always been on the side of the low-income earners and their rights to benefits. I have favoured re-nationalisation of the railways, and I was even sympathetic for socialist Jeremy Corbyn in power as Prime Minister. 

But this case is different. I actually admire Theresa May for her sheer determination to get a deal through, and I admire her for her resolute stance in not giving to these hard-line Brexiteers who are in a sense, baying for her blood. And I admire her husband, Philip May. By reading on how supportive he is towards his beloved during her most difficult moments is heart-moving. And I hope, as a daughter of a vicar and both regular church-goers, they feel free to call on God's grace to empower her in her endeavour. She is going to need it!

But I cannot say the same about the treacherous Jacob Rees-Mogg and his ilk. Immediately after the deal was announced, he immediately campaigned for her to be voted out of office. He was the very first to write a letter of no-confidence. For a leader who has tried her hardest, to be kicked while she is already down is disgraceful. Yet Rees-Mogg is a practising Catholic. He claims to be a devout Christian. Like May, he too goes to church each week. Yet he does this to her. It is because of his religious and educational background that I have singled him out among hard Brexiteers.

Therefore, what has Rees-Mogg's bad behaviour to do with Darwin's evolutionary theory and its consequences? Here I take the guidance of Jesus himself:

Ye shall know them by their fruits.

Matthew 7:16 AV.

Simply this: Despite his Catholic upbringing, I also believe him to be a devout evolutionist despite that he never said this in public. By accepting Darwinism, he also accepts the biologist's idea of racial superiority, that is to say, he believes that the English are a superior nation to all other nations. Charles Darwin himself believed this. His cousin Francis Galton also believed this. therefore it's no surprise that Rees-Mogg also shares their beliefs, as it can be so clearly seen whilst in the public eye.

Having been to Eton, one of Britain's most prestigious schools, and then studied at Oxford, Rees-Mogg never leaves his house without a tie. He even takes his sons out on holiday, each dressed in suit and tie, regardless of the warm Summer weather. Therefore he constantly poses as the ideal English gentleman. And of course, very patriotic, seeking sovereignty, independence, and a hopeful future glory for England. Before now I would have passed all this off as a mere eccentric. But after his campaign to have the PM thrown out whilst in her lowest ebb - that is not eccentricity. Rather it's downright wickedness!

Jacob Rees-Mogg on holiday in New York, 2018.

And here is what I find rather distressing: There are Christians, some even in my own church at Ascot, who supports Jacob Rees-Mogg, and uphold him as a shining beacon of Brexit and the return of traditional Englishness. Furthermore, he is given full credit for his educational and social backgrounds, his patriotism, his stiff upper lip, and year-round smart dress. Indeed, with such support given by those who call themselves Christian but are really graduates, it makes me wonder how I could possibly remain one myself, identifying as being of the same faith. Then again, before now, it's quite likely that they didn't know any better.

Really, I hope their eyes are suddenly opened by the MP's act of treachery and betrayal. To add to this, I have a hope that God's mercy does pierce any veil the Church has over Rees-Mogg's eyes, and to see what his has done, and repent, afterwards letting his colleagues know of his change of mind and give that much-needed support for Theresa May and her struggle to complete a momentous task. 

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

*Jerry Bergman, Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview, Joshua Press, 2014.  

The Cell Phone, Eugenics, and Darwin

One example of forgetfulness occurred last week when my wife and I booked into a hotel in London for a couple of nights. It was late on the first evening when that characteristic and instantly recognisable sound began to issue from within my rucksack at approximately ten-minute intervals:

Bleep...Bleep...Bleep...Bleep...

"Oh no!" I exclaimed. "The cell phone battery is dead and do you know what? I have forgotten to bring the charger."

After a while, as my wife and I were together in bed, she asked,

"Can you remove the battery? I can't sleep with that sound."

I was reluctant at first, as I'm one of those people, where anything is involved, after taking something apart, I always find it impossible to put back together again. So instead, I arose, took the rucksack and wrapped the Vodaphone in thick clothing and placed it back inside the bag. No use. The bleep has that capacity to penetrate any material, regardless of how thick the wrapping may be. Therefore, I managed to pry the phone open and removed the battery from its place. At last, no more bleeping.

Only to replace the battery once back at home, and seeing no response after connecting with its charger. And so, what was wrong? Was it the phone? Well, the unit screen lit up and it started to bleep again, confirming that the battery and back cover were both replaced properly. So could it be the charger itself? Or even the wall socket? So I plugged the charger into another socket. Still no response. And then the phone beeped. It never does that during the powering-up process. So I guess the fault must be with the charger.

Oh, the mystery of technology! It's as if the length of wire had taken offence at being left behind at home, and decided to call it a day at that particular weekend. After making several inquiries at different outlets and getting nowhere, I decided to buy a new cell phone altogether. After all, I had the present one for several years already. And I wanted a phone - yes, just a phone, a device for making calls and to speak to the person at the other end. None of this smartphone lark, which is basically a miniature mobile computer, complete with the Internet.

Never in a million years would I look like and act like a zombie, walking with half-glazed eyes fixed on the device held in front, not looking where I'm going, and being totally unaware of a fast-approaching cyclist or a crushingly-dumb dog-walker who, in all his wisdom, had decided to let his Staffie off its lead in public. Neither would I ever carry an Internet terminal with me wherever I go. After all, I have recently read that Google is able to track you down through the smartphone, no matter where you may be. After all, I don't feel comfortable having someone gawking at me whilst having a pee at a public restroom.

Therefore, a new mobile phone I was after. As I approached the Vodaphone outlet, this woman, half my age but considerably taller, sprinted to the door just as I was about to enter. I was furious! But all I did was mutter under my breath. British stiff upper lip? Or rather I did not want to create a scene. After a couple of minutes, an assistant appeared from the stockroom behind the shop, and he approached me. I directed him to the tall lady who was browsing nearby. At least she was decent enough to realise what she had done was wrong, or that her conscience was bothering her, because she redirected the assistant back to me, and I proceded with the purchase of a new phone.

With my wife, I spent a couple of nights at a rather expensive hotel in London. It has nothing to do with poshness, this particular hotel was step-free from street to our room, a necessity for one confined to a wheelchair. There are many cheaper hotels around, especially in Pimlico, but all have a flight of steps leading to the front door, and furthermore, each being set in a former Victorian residence, lifts were never included in its design. 

This trip was made to attend a two-day Creation International Conference held at the beautiful and large Emmanual Centre, not far from the Houses of Parliament. Three of us attended, a very good friend of ours from another church, my wife and myself. All three of us are devout Young-Earth Creationists, and this conference was in full support of what is taught in the Bible. Just to add, this was not our initial meeting. Creation International had its first ever conference two years previously at the same venue. Back then, as this time, the talks delivered were very edifying.

Creation International Conference 2018, Emmanuel Centre.

The opening talk I found very powerful. How the authority of the Bible was destroyed in Western society by the advent of Darwinism. For me, this is very serious stuff! Because, although hard it may be to believe, I do see a connection between Darwinism and the behaviour of the female at the entrance of the Vodaphone outlet, namely in a sense, being part of her struggle for survival and with such belief, blocking her mind from the truth of the Gospel.

This also brings grief to me. Yes, I have a concern when I looked in an old edition of The Guinness Book of Records which featured a photo of the largest crowd on Earth, which was made up of Hindus gathering for a national festival in India. The crowd was massive. I thought about babies born, grew up, and living a normal life there, without any opportunity to hear and believe the Gospel of Christ. It was easy for me to be grateful that I was born in a Christian country where the Gospel is, or meant to be, available at any mainstream church I called at, regardless of denomination. What hope is there for these Hindus? Or for that matter, having been born in a Middle Eastern country where Islam has full reign? Or even born in Soviet Russia, or in China, back then both under the grip of atheistic Communism?

Really, what is happening in the world? Why such hostility against the truth of the Bible and the Gospel of Christ? It seems as though there are invisible forces in the air, carrying a ferocious hatred of the Truth, and ensuring that mankind as a whole either rejects the Gospel or kept in ignorance of it, so I was reminded at the conference. Europe under Christian influence? This might have been the case during the 18th Century when the Reformation was underway and sporadic revivals took place. But in the 19th Century, something incredulous happened. How could a tiny acorn grow into a mighty oak tree which branches had covered the entire globe? 

It was at the conference, which boasted a Christian bookshop based mainly on Creationism, that I bought a book, Hitler and the Nazi Darwinian Worldview, by Jerry Bergman. A fascinating book, it confirms what I have already suspected, and featured in one of my previous blogs, that there is a direct connection between Darwin's theory of evolution, the survival of the fittest, and natural selection. Darwin's book, On the Origins of Species, was read and absorbed by Darwin's cousin, Englishman Francis Galton, who transferred the universal biological idea of survival of the fittest to social evolution. He wrote, Hereditary Genious, a book on eugenics which became very popular among German scientists and academics. His work was about humans who are physically, mentally or psychologically weak, along with the deformed, the cretin, the homosexual, the non-white, even the politically deviant, all must be wiped off this planet in order to make way for the strong, that is the Aryan Race, which is the tall, white, intelligent German society.

One thing which struck me whilst reading Bergman's book. That is if Darwinism, along with Galton's writings, had never taken off or even ever published, the chance was there would have been no World War II, neither would the Holocaust had ever taken place.

Survival of the fittest involves the mass death of "the weak" in order to make room for "the strong". Not only does this mean the elimination of up to six million Jews, but also the elimination of five million Slavic peoples, making a total of eleven million innocent people exterminated at Nazi death camps during the War. The idea of all this was to allow the German Aryan race thrive and prosper, allowing them to spread across the globe under intense nationalistic and imperialistic beliefs.

Kill the weak! Exterminate the deformed! Put an end to the mentally handicapped! Also, destroy all other "subhumans" including non-Caucasians! Make sure all Jews are exterminated! Make way for the strong! Be patriotic for Germany! Build a worldwide Empire! How diametrically opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ all that is!

Academics, particularly Darwin, Galton, Hitler and many of his educated supporters hated the teachings of Christ, even if both Charles Darwin and Adolf Hitler, along with others, might have put on a religious front to suit their own purposes or to advance their cause. Yet, Darwinism with its evolutionary theories, the concept of survival of the fittest through natural selection dominates our thinking to the extent that only a tiny minority here in the UK accept the Bible as factual history, whilst the evolutionary concept is constantly pushed as fact by the likes of David Attenborough, Andrew Marr, Brian Cox, and others.

At the opening talk, Creation International Conference 2018.

The only way to combat such deadly heresy is to accept the Bible as the true and historic Word of God. And that includes the historicity of the first chapter of Genesis:

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth - Genesis 1:1.

That is no myth, it's history. As much history as the facts about Henry VIII and his six wives. The early chapters of Genesis are not a myth, neither should it be equalled with the legends found in the Babylonian Enuma Elish with its mythical tale of Creation, or from the Gilgamesh Epic, also Babylonian, depicting the legendary version of Noah and the Deluge. Earlier this year we had a graduate preach on the equality of Genesis with the Enuma Elish, thus denying the historicity of the Biblical version and relegating it to mythology.* That is a very dangerous road to take! Perhaps without the graduate realising it, it's not far from believing in Theistic Evolution and eventually to apostasy.

My plea to this graduate and his ilk is: Renounce any mythical dimension of the Creation story and accept and preach the historicity and truthfulness of the first eleven chapters of Genesis. None of these chapters is myth, legend or fable. They are as much factual history as any textbook on British history.

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

*For my blog in direct referral, click here.

The Beauty of a Whiteout.

According to some reports, people living in Canada and in Scandinavia were poking fun at us within the last few days, sending memes on Twitter and other social sites. These memes were all about "the two centimetres of snow which brought Britain to a grinding halt." I suppose we need to be honest with ourselves: We are not used to coping with snow. Even a light dusting poses a threat, because we British just don't know afterwards which direction the weather will take. Whether the light dusting will melt as a result of milder air beginning to blow in from the Atlantic, or whether the icy cold northeasterly blast from Siberia will keep on blowing across the North Sea indefinitely as it collects more moisture from the sea which is then dumped across the UK as snow.

It was on one of these occasions when my wife posted on Facebook her idea of road transport reverting to horse power and donkeys transporting both us and our baggage to our destinations. Unfortunately, she did not receive a single "like" - which seems to be an indication bordering onto the ridiculous and impracticality. With such a present scenario with marooned lorries, cars and trains, maybe the idea of being mocked by Canadians and Scandinavians alike may bear an element of justification after all.

If only one has to consider being stranded inside a car overnight whilst attempting to drive to his destination only a few miles down the road, and then actually getting stuck in the snow and forced to spend the whole night in the vehicle. Indeed, the riddle of the race between the hare and the tortoise would not be that far out of place here. Just as a team of huskies would successfully transport a heavily-laden sleigh with people and their cargo to their destination across vast Canadian plains of ice and snow to arrive in good time, so over here, by the time dusk arrives, not only is the person and his belongings are safe at where he wants to be, but the horse or pony is also safely back at its stable. Indeed, there is more sense in my wife's statement than credited for.

Or for me, walking seems an adequate way to get about in adverse weather conditions. As a cyclist, when I have realised that the bicycle and snow does not make good companions, nothing is better than to slip on a pair of tough hiking boots and set off on foot. And if the overcast sky breaks and the Winter sun comes out, I find it exhilarating on the startling beauty of freshly-fallen snow glinting in the sunlight, making a vivid contrast to the blue sky above. And not just on the ground, but also on the boughs and branches of trees, and even the normally dull rooftops of houses are enhanced by the sheer beauty of crystalline whiteness of the snow glistening in the sun.

And I don't think it was accidental when God created both beast and man alike with legs rather than with wheels. Quite a clever ingenuity, coming to think of it. Legs are far more efficient in moving across snow than wheels, even motorised wheels. Little wonder that at the Terra Nova cross-Antarctic Expedition, it was history's first ever man, Norwegian Roald Amundsen who arrived at the South Pole in December 14, 1911. This was five weeks before rival Briton Robert Scott's arrival. Clever Amundsen! He used a team of huskies to transport him and his gear. Scott relied on wheels and powered vehicles for transport, and tragically lost the race. Very much like over here at present!

I guess we are very fortunate to have the warm Gulf Stream flowing from the Gulf of Mexico, past the Caribbean Islands, towards Britain and Europe. This, to me, is a constant work of God's mercy and goodness, and an important means to sustain life. This stream keeps our Winters mild. Of course, scientists are able to explain how the Gulf Stream operates by means of the Earth's rotation and other necessary forces involved in its existence, but it still stands as one of God's magnificent designs to suit the present.

Therefore, in general we in Britain are unable to cope with a more severe bout of snowfall. As with the Scandinavians, over there snowfall is normal, and I guess, plenty of it. As geology has it, the Danish peninsula is the ultimate landmass blocking the Gulf Stream from warming up the Gulf of Bothnia, bordered by the east coast of Sweden and the west coast of Finland respectively. As a result, this particular tongue of sea not only has the lowest salt content in the world, but freezes over during the Winter months, unlike the Norwegian Sea, where a weak remnant of the Gulf Stream keeps this area short of freezing over.

Therefore, I can't really hold blame to the Scandinavians for their mocking of our inability to handle snow. They are far more used to it. And they are better prepared when travelling. Although I have never visited Scandinavia (a pity, really), I do believe that the main difference between Winter motoring in Sweden to that of in Britain is the universal use of car tyres used by the Swedes adapted to the snow and ice, all of them fitted during Autumn with the expectation of the coming snow season. Like that they can drive safely all year round.

But our British inability to cope with Winter snow does not dampen or minimise our sense of optimism and self-confidence. Despite warnings after warnings of heavy snowfall and gale force winds, motorists continue to climb into their cars. With enough self confidence and optimism enabling them to complete the journey with hardly a hitch, they set off, even while it's already snowing heavily. And when they hit the motorway or trunk road, each driver gets stuck in a traffic jam which remains stationary even throughout the entire night, and then the need to be rescued and even treated for hypothermia.

Oh to hell with the warnings! It's only a smidgen of snow. I'll get where I want to be. It's no problem.

And such words remain within the mind of the driver, so confident, so optimistic. Exactly like the chap I have been privately messaging shortly before this blog was written. Always a good friend of mine, he has expressed such tremendous confidence and optimism over the future of Britain after we had left the European Union. He even re-initialised GB to mean GLOBAL BRITAIN whereas GB initially stood for Greater Britain, and therefore with his new meaning to those two letters, I have interpreted as meaning world dominance, even though he may deny that. However, according to a Guardian newspaper psychologist, there is a connection between Brexit and the quest for global power, not unlike that of the former Empire, as the spirit of imperialism lies dormant within the genes of the most patriotic. In referral to my friend, this guy is also a regular church-going Christian and one-time house-group leader around the early 1980's.

Choleric in temperament and therefore naturally task-minded and pragmatic, it is equally natural for him to be optimistic and confident, which also gives him a certain level of difficulty in fathoming out more abstract or theoretical ideas and notions. (And for the record, any settlements, homes, schools, shopping precincts, industry, public transport, roads, and many more projects were most likely all envisioned initially by a Choleric. Therefore their presence in this world are beneficial for necessary living.)

Therefore he couldn't understand how I could link his nationalistic self-confidence with Charles Darwin. So I wrote to explain that there is no real difference between world dominance and the Edenic Lie. If the Bible is to be taken as historic, then the story of the Edenic Lie and the Fall are also history. In the third chapter of Genesis, the Serpent entices Eve to eat the fruit of a certain tree which God instructed not to eat from. In further coaxing, the serpent gives a false promise that by eating the fruit would open their eyes of understanding, and become like gods knowing good and evil, and in effect calling God a liar for saying they would die instead. Eve fell for the deceit because she found the idea of becoming divine very attractive, and gave some of the fruit to Adam with the hope of the same elevation to godhood.

And here is the link between the Edenic Lie and Charles Robert Darwin with his theory of evolution. Evolution is all about the slow progress from single-cell organisms dwelling in the primeval ocean to homo sapiens living in cities, making progress in sophisticated technology, and continuing on the upward progress with the assumption towards divinity.

But there is a very serious fault with this theory. If evolution is true and historic and the Edenic Lie and the Fall mere mythology, then death did not come by Adam's transgression, as the Bible says otherwise. If death did not come from Adam's fall, then Jesus Christ was not able to overcome death by atonement and his resurrection, therefore making salvation an impossibility. The reality of Divine Creation, the Fall, and death entering the world through Adam's sin is absolutely vital for the reality of the Christian faith. There is no room for compromise. If there was no Adam and Eve, there was no Jesus Christ either.

Therefore it is quite straightforward to see a direct link between my Choleric friend's national pride, optimism, confidence, and his quest for global supremacy, with the Edenic Lie as recorded in the Bible. The want for global supremacy, even on a national scale, is nothing more than the Edenic Lie re-enacted over and over again. And in the spiritual realm, self-confidence and optimism could be fatally dangerous!

Such in the case of judgement day. On this subject, it is Jesus himself who prophetically teaches that at the door of heaven there will be many standing outside and refused admission. This is a really a scary situation and I believe this is a serious warning towards those with self-confidence and optimism. For the Lord included this in his sermon, using the AV for maximum impact:

Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

And I will profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Matthew 7:21-23.

I never knew you. I never knew you. I never knew you. And such words will echo in their heads for all eternity. What a dreadful thought that is, to be told that by the Lord himself, I never knew you. In my younger days I always thought: Wrong religion. Wrong kind of church service. Unable to shake off a specific sin. But I no longer believe it's any of those. By studying the defence these people use to plead for entry, a common theme emerges. Self-confidence, optimism. The deceit in believing that these guys can work their own way to heaven, even using the name of Christ. When alive, these people did not turn to Jesus to have their sins washed away and to receive forensic acquittal. Instead they trusted in their own natural abilities, using the name of Jesus to further their own quest for world fame, reputation and greatness, along with divinity, a state of godhood.

And so I write, the snow outside is now slowly melting. The wind has changed. The crisis has peaked. By Monday, commuters can travel to work by train, bus and car as normal. Schools will re-open. Offices will be fully staffed once more. The pulse of life will beat again. Optimism with Brexit will continue to be debated in Parliament. My friend will continue to be so sure of the future, perceived with a rosy optimism for national greatness and supremacy. Many church-goers will continue to revel in their own self-righteousness, thinking that they are doing God's will. The pulse of British life will beat on.

But with Charles Darwin's theory fully in charge of our minds, God will have to be left out altogether.