Christian Love or Atheist's Brilliance?

October 16th 1555. The one day marked in British history as "victorious" for two Anglican clergymen who were burnt alive at the stake outside Balliol College of Oxford University. The two referred to cannot be any other than Nicholas Ridley and Hugh Latimer.

But why this waste of life? Could it be their conviction that the Catholic Church who ordered their execution believed in the Transubstantiation while these two didn't? To make things a little simpler, this long word simply means a change of a substance from a loaf of bread to the body of Christ and red wine into the blood of Christ. The Catholic Church taught - and still teaches - that at every altar around the world, at the Eucharist or Holy Communion, a miracle takes place when a piece of bread changes into the actual flesh and blood of Jesus Christ, and the eating of this assures the partaker of entry into Heaven after death on condition that no mortal sin is committed without penance whilst still alive.

Ridley and Latimer denied the reality of the miracle - and they had a point. The host, which is not bread but a thin round wafer, remains the same after the blessing. Latimer and Ridley insist that these two substances are only symbols representing the body and blood of Jesus Christ crucified, and with this, they paid with their lives, with one of them crying out that may the light of truth will never be extinguished here in England as the flames started to lick.

Then came the publication of Charles Dickens' writings some 283 years after Ridley's demise, giving quite a detailed description of the Anglican Church in his day, and it wasn't pleasant! He likened it to riding the high horse of morality whilst heavily judgemental towards sinners, right to the point of hating them and condemning them all to Hell - and yet still remaining mutually exclusive from such sinners. And such was English society during the 1838 Dickensian era when theft and prostitution thrived in the city streets amidst dirt and squalor. And each Sunday, these well-to-do people, dressed in the most expensive height of smart fashion would be seen filing into a nearby church where no thief or prostitute dare venture.

Moving forward into the present and with the advance of the Internet, I see something very sinister happening right before me. Sinister? In Italian, the word is sinistre, meaning left, such as my left hand or left foot. Maybe "weird" instead? Perhaps that's more appropriate. But it's not good. I'm referring to the closure of our church at Ascot, along with most if not all other churches, and the advance of popularity towards atheists on YouTube. This coronavirus pandemic had our Government order the shutdown of all public gatherings including churches, creating instead, "virtual meetings" on the computer screen, followed by "virtual coffee" on Zoom. And so each of us appears in a small individual frame, set in a structure which is not unlike a pigeonhole. 

Although our elders are excited that "more people tuning into our services than before" - in referral to outsiders, whether Christians or unbelievers - nevertheless such virtual meetings cannot hold a candle to the real thing, the proper church meeting where strong bonds, body contact and hugging have all proven to be very beneficial to all three, spiritual, physical and mental health alike.

Lack of physical contact brought in by fear of this pandemic has already proven detrimental to me personally, but I'll come back to that. Instead, I have become rather intrigued by up to nine celebrities which I'll divide by three groups of three. Three authors: Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and the late Christopher Hitchens, all self-confessed atheists. Then I'm already familiar with three BBC reporters: Andrew Marr, Simon Reeve and Brian Cox, of whom only Andrew Marr is the atheist, the other two are more likely agnostics, although both might have had bad experiences with organised religion, at least Simon Reeve admit this. Then the three YouTubers, all self-confessed atheists: Cosmic Skeptic whose real name is Alex O'Connor, Genetically Modified Skeptic, whose real name is Drew McCoy, and SciManDan, whose only clue to his name being Dan or Daniel. Of the three YouTubers, I have met and spoken to Alex O'Connor face-to-face at Oxford.

Concentrating on the three YouTubers, their popularity is reflected by some stats I did in preparation of this blog. Between them, at midday on 8/8/2020, they have 133,794,891 views. This is divided as follows: SciManDan: 76,238,071 views and 371k subscribers. Drew McCoy has 26,546,736 views with 296k subscribers, and Alex O'Connor has 31,010,084 views with 360k subscribers. Boy! I wish that many would read my blogs!

Of the three, SciManDan I found to be more intriguing. Married with children, he has several channels, one of the rebuking the Flat Earth theory. Another is a tutorial on physics, where I learn that energy is always transferred from one source to another without petering out, a concept I should have learned at school.

His rebuke against Flat Earth and his knowledge of physics bring out his high level of education. And for a Christian such as I am, this poses a level of embarrassment. This is due to the awkward fact that Flat-Earthers are generally Christians who believe that our planet is a divinely-created flat disc covered with a solid glass-like dome which is referred to as the firmament, according to Genesis 1:6-8.

Among Christians, Flat-Earthers are a tiny minority. Although here in the UK, committed Christians makes up about 2% of the population, a great number of them believe in Theistic Evolution, thus accepting that the Earth is a sphere billions of years old and organic evolution went through its process under God's guidance and supervision. Over the years I have associated with Christian graduates who were committed to Theistic Evolution, on a regular basis. Then there is a class of Christian believers who are Biblical Creationists and I'm in that class. Therefore what do I believe in?

I believe that the heavens, that is, the entire Universe, and the Earth were created supernaturally in 6x24-hour days as narrated in Holy Scripture. The Earth is a sphere wrapped by an atmosphere, and it has always been that, a sphere. As for the firmament, this was not a glass-like dome covering a flat disc. Instead, the Hebrew indicates an expanse, a layer of water vapour in the upper atmosphere surrounding the planet. Whether it was in the stratosphere or the troposphere, I cannot be sure, but as any meteorologist would agree, the firmament or expanse is not there now. Therefore, what has happened to it?

Could the collapse of the expanse, along with tremendous tectonic movements within the Earth's crust be the cause of the Noachian Deluge which wiped out all antediluvian life? And that which is endorsed as historic by Jesus Christ himself? However, that's a topic for another day.

Thus I could be classed as one of a small minority who stands by my conviction. The likes of SciManDan could laugh aloud if he were to read this. But this along with the embarrassment is the presence of what I would call Hyper-Creationists who believe in a flat earth and also partakes in the Christian faith. Such people make me ashamed to be a Christian, especially under the scrutiny of well-educated atheists.

But going back to the Coronavirus pandemic, I miss the church service and fellowship resulting from being physically present. However, one friend of mine runs an outdoor Bible class at South Hill Park, not far from my home. Eight people, I think, were present including two couples, three single men and myself. Then I was involved in an incident there where, I'm sure, would convince any learned atheist that Christianity is nothing more than man-made religious opium.

Months of lockdown was beginning to take its toll. Unable for us to travel, repeated hospital appointments along with repeated calls for an ambulance, watching my beloved suffering intense pain, her immobility, this wretched compulsion to wear facemasks when having a covering over my face affects my throat, causing irritation and coughing, watching a Democracy turn into a Police State where anyone not wearing a mask in public is likely to get nicked...

This fear. This universal hysteria! This universal and hysterical fear of a virus which seems to be proving that it's far, far less fatal than that which is spewed out by the Government, its allied scientists, and the Media, both TV and newspapers. Figures of death statistics are shown to be inflated, including the death statistics of those who were tested positive but had died from a different cause, even after recovery from the initial pathogenic infection. And so far, although the rate of infection is rising again, forcing quarantine for everyone returning from certain countries overseas, the rate of hospital admissions and death numbers remains static.

One afternoon this week, I return from a shopping trip to see my wife lying on the floor with the phone in her hand, trying to call for an ambulance as she lay gripped in agonising back pain. Quickly I took out the bottle of Morphine oral solution from the cupboard and gave her seven millilitres, which is below the maximum ten, and spoke to the person at Ambulance Control at the other end of the phone saying that everything is in hand and an ambulance is not required. I then watched Alex recover as I laid her on the sofa. One sidekick of morphine is sleepiness, and so she slept as I made my way to the Bible study group.

Seeing my beloved lying on the floor when returning home is not a new thing at all. The first time was when she was pregnant with our second daughter and she was rushed by ambulance to hospital where she was kept in overnight. Fortunately, both she and the baby were okay. But there were other times, later in life, when I find her unconscious and not breathing, as her throat muscles had involuntary tightened around her airway, and I had to carry out a resuscitation procedure on her.

Therefore, my spirit was very low when I made off to the Bible study group. Only seven other people were there but the circle was very wide in relation to the few who were present. When looking for a place to settle - straightforward, really - a panic began to ensue as if I was the disease itself and people began to fuss, lest I pass the (non-existent) virus to them.

And that was when I tipped over the edge. My anger and frustration, up to the present contained, suddenly exploded. And out came language so strong that any thick iron bar would buckle under its force. Six of the people took my onslaught in silence, most likely realising that such a release of tension was necessary for my future wellbeing.

But not Steve, the unmarried moralist who had to mount his high horse to shout back at me not to swear like that. Oh, I could have knocked his lights out! Nothing - indeed nothing - could have added insult to the wound in a way this moralist had just done! This episode gave me a very bad worldview of the Christian faith.

It's not the first time my view of the Christian church had dipped so low! As I might have said before: If it wasn't for God's grace and familiarity with the Bible, this experience would have cemented my atheism forever! I actually believe that the likes of Steve would have sent many to Hell rather than to Heaven. Therefore, by making a comparison, had the likes of Alex O'Connor, Drew McCoy, SciManDan, or even Andrew Marr or Sam Harris had been present, I believe that one of them would disregard any virus threat to lay both hands on my shoulders and quietly instruct me to breathe deeply and smoothly. 

"You are right in everything you have said. Now gently... Breathe in, breathe out, be calm and let your emotion gently settle."

And guess what, during my lifetime I have calmed a few angry men by using that very method. And it works.

Brian Cox - more approachable than many a religious moralist?

All this makes me ask: Do other Christians ever get angry? If not, then indeed they are truly regenerated in Christ - whilst I'm still in my sins. But if they do, how do they deal with it? Especially the likes of Steve. An interesting point here.

This Dickensian attitude among Christians could become a thing of the past if Christians show true agape love for each other. And that, I feel, is what the Church desperately needs in order to outshine the most clever of atheists. And according to what I have seen and heard, Christians just don't have such agape love. Plenty of education, yes, plenty of wealth, yes, holding down good jobs, yes. But having the same love God has for us? - Er, no. We all fall short in this area, including me. Until we change, atheists will always run rings around us in mocking ridicule.

Father God I Wonder...

The above title is also the title of one of our wedding songs: 

Father God I wonder how I managed to exist without the knowledge of your parenthood and your loving Care...

I am aware that such a statement would be scorned to intensity by anyone who was not brought up by a church-going family, even by those whose parents did bring to church during childhood and are at present committed atheists, also by those who cannot justify the presence of a "Fatherly loving God" to a world full of suffering, war, starvation, disease, poverty - whilst the few who are well-off financially, who are also well educated and hold a good job - are more likely the ones who attend church and acknowledge a Fatherly loving God. In a city such as London during the 1970's, a man dressed in a business suit walks hurriedly past a beggar besotted by alcohol, pretending not to see him. The beggar is slumped there, not because he was foolish enough to throw away his life, but because of the yet-to-be-recognised mental illness known as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder or PTSD. 

PTSD after spending six years fighting in a global war. Probably knowing that some 383,700 British military personnel had never made it through such a horrible conflict. His thoughts constantly going back to his days at the barracks. His days when he was lean, strong, muscular, clean-shaven, among his closest friends, and maybe with a special friend who was closer than a brother - very much like David and Jonathan. And the one he had to watch die from his war-wounds as he lay in his arms and listening to his last, gasping breath. And forever remaining shocked by such an experience, he never properly adapted to civil life, especially with food rationing lasting some years after that, he remained unemployable and eventually homeless, ending his days forlorn in the streets. Indeed, by the 1970's, the sight of some well-dressed people marching by, holding up high a banner which read, God Loves You stirred only revulsion. Even worse if the banner read, Prepare to meet your God! After such trauma, especially after the loss of such a close companion, anything religious or with any spiritual slant had as much appeal to the beggar as finding a live maggot in your food.

I guess I was very fortunate to have been born during the Baby-Boom generation. Just young enough to miss the obligatory National Service, as the compulsory side to it was abolished by Harold Wilson's Government by May 1963, when I was just eleven years old. Indeed, as I see it, this was God's grace, although many would disagree, blaming the doing away with National Service with the gradual decline of discipline, especially in schools, along with the de-masculinization of the average British man, a trend so deplored by many Right-leaning newspaper journalists and columnists.    

Probably I can understand why the love of God towards the world is so misunderstood or so difficult to grasp. By entering a Gothic church or cathedral, whether Anglican or Catholic, yet remains a constant reminder of our own shortcomings, and being in the presence of a holy God, to whom we all will eventually give an account. So, as a boy, conversation was in whispers, as if afraid to disturb God from his sleep (actually it was so not to disturb anyone deep in prayer, often seen in Catholic churches). And the need to dress smartly. After all, the invention of the term Sunday Best was by no means accidental, as if God would be offended at a shirt worn without a tie, the sight of denim, or trousers with a hole at the knee, or the sight of a damp circle under the arms, or for a woman to wear a top or dress with a low neckline, or heaven forbid, she arrives without wearing a hat or bonnet. And dare if you accidentally and embarrassingly let out a belch, or even a resounding fart in church! And so such a concept of who God is, with his rather judgemental, punitive character does not warm the average human heart to himself, but from the more timid he raises fear, or at least some form of apprehension.

And at school, that was exactly how God was perceived, and not only a number of boys became "atheists" but I too. Or to be more honest with myself, a God hater. Could this be the real reason why a biologist, after reading a recently-published book by Charles Lyell, The Principles of Geology, the scene was set to launch perhaps the most anti-Gospel philosophy a man can think of, and after a visit to the Galapagos Islands, he himself wrote, On the Origin of Species, which made its author a household name. No doubt, Charles Darwin grew up in a very similar religious environment as I did, maybe more so, for after growing up as a Unitarian, part of his higher education was at the University of Cambridge to train as an Anglican clergyman. Apparently, he couldn't have been that impressed with the character of God either, with his emphasis of holiness, accountability, and judgement, but rather thin on his love and redemption through Jesus Christ, for he never made it to the profession. So instead, his love of biology grew, and he eventually dared to challenge the record of Divine Creation as revealed in the early chapters of Genesis.

And so his theory of Evolution became the source of truth rather than that presented in Holy Scripture. And it should not be a surprise since Darwin was an Englishman, and even voted as the Greatest Briton of all Time by BBC Correspondent Andrew Marr not long after the turn of the Millennium, and in addition with Charles Lyell being a Scotsman, it's no coincidence that the United Kingdom has become the motherland of Uniformitarian Geology and its younger biological sibling.

The social repercussions of this Lyell/Darwinian theories could not be more devastating. Racism is linked to evolution, which is why in time past, particularly in the 1980's, bananas were thrown at black players at a football pitch by white supremacists and mimicking monkey sounds at the stands. And according to Internet sources, this still happens at parts of Europe to this day. And let's face it, I believe this form of racism is still present here, although in the subconscious rather than outright. Maybe, as I once watched on TV, there were City employers who secretly messaged their agencies not to send black candidates for job interviews. And how could I not mention The Daily Mail columnist Katie Hopkins referring to everyone who would have preferred to remain in the European Union as one of a population of monkeys, as an indication and a yardstick that English patriotism is linked to evolutionary advancement?    

And professing ours to be a Christian country as opposed of being Islamic, our culture still lacks the Fatherly love of God engrained in its consciousness, but still rather perceived to be more of a divine bully who has respect for those higher educated toffs who dress well for church, but has little, if any regard, for others who don't quite fit the ideal model. And yet I can hear the pages of the Bible rustle like leaves of a tree rustling in the wind. The apostle James devotes the whole of his second chapter of his letter specifically to this issue. He wrote against showing special favour to the rich man who enters the house-church (as they were in those days) dressed in purple and fine clothing, whilst at the same time showing contempt for the poor man in rags who also walks in. Oh, its all very well believing on the intellectual level that only one true God exists (in contrast to a pantheon of idols and lesser divinities) but what is that to the watching world if showing neglect to the one who is cold and hungry, even to the point of publicly dishonouring God?

James concluded that you see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone, and just as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is also dead - (James 2:24, 26). Sure, I'm aware that anybody has the capacity for doing good. Richard Dawkins was quite specific about this. The trouble is: Atheists such as Dawkins evaluate the motives behind these good deeds as more genuine within those who are irreligious, but more out of fear of eternal punishment within the religious group. And I have to say that he is right, at least in part. Because during the last forty-plus of being a Christian believer myself, I have come across teachings indicating that fear should be the correct motivation for Christian commitment, simply because our love for God and for each other is not yet made perfect. And this hadn't come from a church layman but from a Cambridge-educated and Bachelor of Arts graduate, church pastor, itinerant preacher and author of several books. It is unfortunate that although this scholar has given great credit to the Bible, its historicity and truthfulness, I have wondered what kind of impact has he made to the unbelieving world. Are favours and good deeds done to others out of fear or even out of apprehension for the possibility of eternal punishment really that virtuous?

Indeed, this sort of thing brings the whole of the Christian faith into disrepute in the sight and hearing of outsiders. Good deeds done out of fear. This is like petrol fuel being thrown onto the fires of atheism! As I once read in the spiritual section of a gay website, one contributor wrote in the forums that the trouble with religious people is that their so-called "goodness" is done out of fear of Hell, and therefore his atheism is justified, especially where churches hold a high condemnation rate for all homosexuals. I wanted to write a reply to defend my faith in Christ and save its credibility. I wasn't able to write anything. Why? Because I knew that he was right, and I had nothing to say. But even worse than that, the idea of God  as a fatherly figure is hardly given any credit, but instead perceived as a strict moralist and a sky-bully. Little wonder that he is looked upon as a kind of spaghetti-god in the heavens, a candidate for the most abusive ridicule from the gay community.

The true Christian lives in love, love for his heavenly Father and love for others, especially other believers. That is the main emphasis of John's first letter. Even in his Gospel, Jesus is recorded as giving a new commandment for all believers, and this new commandment is to love one another, because through this the world will know that they are Jesus' true disciples, that they love each other as he loved them, right to the point of laying down his life for the one loved, as Christ himself laid down his life for a sinning world - John 13:35.

Perhaps this was what Jesus meant when he says that we are the light of the world and a city built on a hill (Matthew 5:14-16) - so let your light shine so by your good deeds men may praise God in heaven. The only way that God could be glorified is for the sinner to repent - to change his mind from unbelief to believing in his heart that this Jesus is the risen Christ, and so he receives mercy, is justified, and given eternal life. Every sinner saved brings glory to God. And everyone who lives in genuine love can call God his Father, and convert the sinner from his ways. 

A Reincarnation Of Nimrod.

The RMS Titanic was the greatest cruise ship that was ever built in British maritime history, which was launched on 31 May 1911. At 269 metres, it was the longest of three Olympic ships which were built at the same time, the other two were RMS Olympic and HMHS Britannic, all three owned by Star Line. Built in Belfast and registered at the port of Liverpool, it set off on its maiden voyage on April 10, 1912 for New York harbour.

The Titanic was no doubt the apex in epitome of the great British Empire. With First, Second, and Third Class passengers, a rather dynamic encapsulation of our national culture, with first class bathed in luxury and looked on with special favour by the crew, whilst third class accommodation was more plain and lacking of that special attention from crew members with which all first class passengers enjoyed. It was also boasted that the structure of the liner was so sound, particularly of the main hull, that not even God was able to sink it. The attitudes of sheer pride, optimism and self assurance were incorporated into its design was also the epitome on how the British felt about their homeland and Empire. Perhaps even on how it looks from the outside counted high in importance as well, as the fourth funnel was non-functional, so I read once. Instead it was added to enhance the ship's status and majesty. Indeed, the unsinkable Titanic was the perfect encapsulation of the indestructible British Empire.  

Of course, we all know what happened during the early hours of April 14, 1912. A solid mass of frozen water happened to drift far further south from the Arctic than most other icebergs. The bow of the ship was heading at full speed towards it, and had the ship remained on course, chances that the sharp edge of the bow might have cut right through the ice, leaving minimal damage to the hull, and successfully docking at New York before the need for inspection and maintenance. Instead, panic gripped the crew members responsible and swerved the vessel to the left in an attempt to miss the iceberg. Wretched things those floating lumps of ice has always been, there was an underwater ledge or protrusion of some kind which tore into the unsinkable hull, and the water gushed in.

Oh such an irony of it all! The very vessel even God was unable to sink. And it was destroyed on its very first cross-Atlantic sailing - not by military might of an underwater torpedo launched by an enemy submarine, neither by a drifting mine, but by a lump of frozen water, itself in the process of melting into the ocean as it drifted south. As the encapsulation of the British Empire sank into the dark depths, up to 1,500 of its passengers, instead of being greeted by New York's Statue of Liberty, they found themselves standing at the throne of their Maker to face Judgement.

Yet I can't help but hear the shaking of the leaves, the pages of the Bible. Fierce pride, self-confidence and optimism resulted in the post-Diluvian population to amass and build a city and a tower which would reach to heaven (Genesis 11:1-9) - an epitome of human greatness and an attempt to reach immortality through their own efforts and without God. I can't help seeing strong similarities between the Tower of Babel and the RMS Titanic - the only difference was that whilst one attempted to reach the sky from the ground, the other - in a sense a tower floating horizontally attempting to cross an ocean, both came to their end before their initial destinies were fulfilled. It is to be noted that there was nothing wrong in these projects in themselves. From the dawn of history, construction and ocean navigation has always been the need for survival. But in these cases, motivation was the cause of such downfall.

And so I discussed with Alex whilst watching a BBC 2 documentary, Brexit, earlier in the week. This one-hour long programme was a series of interviews conducted by BBC correspondent Laura Kuenssberg, at both politicians and to the public in the streets. Most intriguing was an answer delivered by an elderly lady in Yorkshire when asked about last year's Referendum. Although I can't recall exactly her answer on a word-by-word basis, what's is quoted here is a good approximation:

I cannot understand why our Government has got us to vote in a referendum when we are not educated enough to know the facts behind such a decision we had to make.

Of all debates I have ever listened or read about in connection with this issue, nothing so far has ever eclipsed such a statement! And yet she was one of many who voted to leave the European Union.

What a contrast that statement was in comparison with one interviewee, former Education Minister Michael Gove. A devout Brexit advocate, he insisted that the UK should now walk away from the Union with no strings attached. When asked by the reporter of any adverse consequence of such a move, his answer was that we must be optimistic and be confident for the future of our country, for with our own efforts (without God) we will succeed with world trade without the need for European Union membership. Judging by his self confident and optimistic tone and attitude, I have wondered whether Michael Gove is a reincarnation of Nimrod, the ancient governor behind the Tower of Babel project!

Tory ex Education Secretary Michael Gove.

And on the same evening of the documentary, a casual browse on Facebook came up with a post by atheist Richard Dawkins. What he said was in a away a strong rebuke to Michael Gove and his fellow Brexit supporters, backing what our dear lady in Yorkshire has said, that how can we seal the fate of our children and grandchildren with such a future without knowing any of possible consequences, and on top of this, without any hope of reversing the decision in the future, or if ever the Union would ever accept the UK back into membership. And the worst aspect of all this will be that our children must face this brave new world alone, after all of those who voted out are dead and gone. So says Richard Dawkins.

If there was one occasion I had to agree wholeheartedly with such a persistent atheist, it has to be on this issue. For here is one occasion when Dawkins made far better sense than many "dumb" Christians who voted to leave, without proper knowledge and without many years left to live! And talking about "dumb Christians" - that is what people like Richard Dawkins perceive us to be who believe in the Young Earth Creation as historical. He did admit though, that he has more respect for a Young Earth Creationist who believe in the historicity of Holy Scripture, than he does for those who believe in Theistic Evolution - an attempt by Christians to make better sense of the Gospel to unbelievers.

Websites are popping up on the Internet, both on Google and on You-Tube, ridiculing us Creationists in believing that we live on a flat Earth. Yet despite of that, I don't believe that Dawkins is assuming we're thinking that the Earth is flat. In the forty-plus years of being a Christian myself, I have never come across a fellow Christian who believe in a flat Earth. But I have come across many, many Christian graduates who believe in Theistic Evolution. Yet lately, I have been watching videos of professing Christians advocating that the Earth is flat in accordance to Biblical revelation. There is a growing number of these videos which are gaining views by the thousands. These people are not hipsters or eccentrics who dress funny. They are professionals who dress for work in suit and tie, therefore a cause for respect. One flat-Earth advocate, I believe, is an airline pilot. As they insist that the Bible teaches a flat Earth under a solid dome known as the firmament, and is watched by scoffing unbelievers, I'm pretty sure that it won't be too long for an average Christian to be the target of relentless teasing and ridicule by scoffers, together with their rejection of the Bible.

Ridiculed by unbelievers who knows that the earth is spherical. So does the average unbeliever who uses the flat-Earth theory to ridicule the Bible, to deny the existence of God, and to trust in themselves, in science, in a strong economy, and their optimism for the future. To them, Science is their saviour, not Jesus Christ. And so is their belief in a strong, independent economy and in a rosy future.

I find this fascinating! I can't help but marvel at such a scenario.  A life without God whilst mocking the truth of the Bible, political optimism, self confidence, reaching to the skies by self effort, science as saviour, pride in nationalism and glory in national sovereignty, the Tower of Babel, the Titanic - I could well be asking: Are all these mental and emotional attitudes - from pride in national sovereignty and Empire to flat-Earth advocates - a fruit of an adverse spirit in the air bent on its attempt to keep us all from the truth of the Gospel and the glory of God? And could this adverse spirit be blinding us from the real reason why we are here: to know God and enjoy eternal life, which is in his Son Jesus Christ?

Hostility and ridicule against Holy Scripture is alarming. Why this hunch against the Bible - hatred even? Even if the Bible itself does teach a spherical Earth. For example, Isaiah 40:22 says that his throne is above the circle of the Earth. So these scoffers use this verse in their insistence that the Bible teach a flat Earth. But as a child, whenever I was able to see the Sun safely through a certain type of cloud cover, I was convinced that our nearest star was a flat disc. It looks so much like a flat disk. As for the moon, when full, it too looks like a flat disc. And during the first and last quarters, when the moon was only half lit, it resembled a white pancake carefully folded in half! The Bible writer's view was more understanding. A sphere will always look circular, no matter from which angle it is viewed from. Then Job 26:7 says that the Earth is round and hangs upon nothing. That is exactly what Neil Armstrong saw when he stood on the moon in 1969. My apologies to the scoffer, but the Bible and Science are far more true to each other than these sceptics makes out to be.

Earth taken from Moon's surface, 1969.

Science does not refute Holy Scripture, rather it backs it. Another example of this are the Levitical laws about sex. Science has discovered that promiscuity encourages sexual-transmitted diseases. This form of illness can be extremely painful and is also the cause of infertility. Also children born of mothers with such diseases were often arrived blind or crippled. In the Old Testament, God's intention was to spare us from such unnecessary suffering. And so did Paul to Christian believers at Corinth. He instructed them to flee fornication (1 Corinthians 6:12-20), because these Christians were bedding with prostitutes - a cause for Christ-dishonouring diseases which are fully backed up by science.

Hostility towards God and the Bible is totally unnecessary. One of the greatest verses in the Bible is Luke 11:13. Here are the words straight out of the mouth of Jesus Christ himself:

If you, being evil, know how to give good things to your children, how much more will your Father in heaven will give the Holy Spirit to those who ask him!

Receiving the Holy Spirit by the asking of one who is evil! There is no prerequisites. Jesus didn't even say that you must first believe in Him, although such a level of faith must be there in order to ask. There are, in my own opinion, three great passages in the Bible which encapsulate the whole Gospel: Luke 11:13 as just quoted, John 3:14-17, and 1 Corinthians 15:3-4. Then the rest of the New Testament backs up into changing your mind from not believing to believing in your heart that this Jesus of Nazareth is the risen Christ:- will lead to salvation and reconciliation with God. It is so simple. I find it very puzzling that with great promises such as these, one can be so hostile and unbelieving.

National pride may seem like a virtue to those who advocate it, belief in a spherical Earth is common sense endorsed by Science, but only faith in Jesus Christ as Saviour make the believer fully whole, worthy and purposeful.

An Example of Inter-Class Friendship.

A few months ago, a long-standing friend who I knew for the better part of thirty-five years, handed me a leaflet after the end of the morning service. It advertised a coming Creation Ministries Conference which would be held over two days at the Emmanuel Centre in Central London, quite close to the Houses of Parliament. This friend of mine, who is also my Financial and Pensions Advisor, has always been a keen Creationist, to the extent that while filling out some Private Pension forms at my home, he spotted a book on our bookshelf, The Last Two Million Years, a publication from the Readers Digest series of books and magazines, and questioned our commitment to the Biblical truth of Divine Creation, including a Young Earth, as opposed to the popular notion of the planet being billions of years old.

I explained, truthfully, that the book was given to us as a gift by someone else who didn't really want it any more, and we simply kept it. Other than that, we (Alex and I) assured him that we are committed Creationists. 

Emmanuel Centre, London

That had not always been the case. Up to 1973, at twenty years of age, I was a committed Evolutionist, having been fanatical about Dinosaurs during my school days of the mid-sixties. It was when alone in the house during a thunderstorm outside that I decided to pick up a Bible and find out for myself how it all began. I was very moved as I read through the first three chapters of Genesis, and becoming tense when I read through the verses on how first Eve, than Adam took the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, against God's own instructions. I needed no more persuasion. Immediately I had converted from an Evolutionist to a Creationist at an instant, as a result of reading these three chapters, and praying, asking God to forgive me for all those years as a believer in Darwinism.

But there was a dilemma, one I would have considered quite serious: the reconciliation of the existence of the Dinosaurs with the Young Earth theory. From that night of conversion, I have found no problem with the Biblical view that early mankind must have co-existed with Dinosaurs, especially before the Deluge of Noah's day, which gives an adequate answer not only to these creature's sudden demise and extinction, but also explain the quick formation of fossils, as it is agreed among Palaeontologists and Geologists that water was the agent for all fossil formation, where ever they are found. But I was already laughed down for advocating this concept, with atheistic scientists such as Richard Dawkins comparing the time scale with New York bordering onto Los Angeles. Therefore, it's not too much of a surprise to have seen various pictorial literature of Creationism tending to associate the rise of "beasts of the Earth" on the sixth day as consisting of a modern horse, elephant, sheep, and cattle, along with any species alive at present, as if the artist was too embarrassed to include long-extinct species such as what we now refer to as Dinosaurs. All this didn't help, along with the rather curious assumption that the sun, moon, and all the stars of the entire Universe were all four days younger than the Earth itself, leaving me to wonder how the planet was illuminated in the first place, with day and night already existing. How was I to tell my Darwin-believing friends what I now know to be true, without being made the laughing-stock of a company I was working for? 

So began a long process of re-learning, which provided such a challenge to me back then. Like the time when one mocker asked me who was Cain's wife, if only he existed on the entire planet, along with his brother Abel, and their parents Adam and Eve. Although unable to answer at the time, such a challenge spurred me to dig into the Bible itself and bring out the clues which readily answers who Cain's wife was. And such a question could be easily answered by reading Genesis chapter four and five. Cain slew his brother Abel, and not long after that, Eve gave birth to a replacement for the Messianic Line: Seth. Then in chapter five, we read that Seth was born 130 years after Creation, which gives ample time for Eve to give birth to many other sons and daughters before the murder, an idea backed up by Cain's own fear of repercussions for the killing, along with is ability to "build a city" named after his son Enoch. If true, then this brings up the idea of humans having superior genome early in history, in addition to Eve's birthing prowess, also providing the answer to the question I have long been asking: How on earth could Abimelech King of Gerar take such an interest in the aged Sarah, Abraham's wife, while she was already in her nineties? (Genesis 20) - unless Sarah's superior genome caused her to remain astoundingly beautiful and youthful-looking, even at her apparent old age.

This embarrassment over Creationism could be the reason why, during Religious Education lessons at school, the Biblical chronology began with the call of Abraham, totally ignoring all pre-Abrahamic Scriptures. It left the door wide open for mockery from scoffers, who insists that Darwin's Evolutionary processes were the only way we got here in the first place. So re-learning was a long process, which included my first backpacking visit in 1976 to the Holy Land, where I fell in love with the ancient city of Jerusalem, after discovering to be the most important city in the entire Bible, and therefore in the whole of human history. There was even one archaeological marvel, an ancient water conduit now referred to as Hezekiah's Tunnel, which was dug through solid rock under the city itself under the direction of the king of Judah in 700 BC, which I have explored in 1976, and again in 1993. It is mentioned twice in the Old Testament: 2 Kings 20:20, and 2 Chronicles 32:30.  Simply this: If the city which the entire Bible has put such emphasis actually exists, and can be physically located, then why deny the historicity of Divine Creation?

Inside Hezekiah's Tunnel with one other companion, 1976 

The Bible is true. The same tunnel with myself out of the way!

Last week the three of us made our way to London to spend the night there. My wife and I boarded the train, along with a third person who also has a passion for Creationism, and is a subscriber of the Creation Ministries website. He was willing to join us after I invited him. The biggest difference between him and me was not so much the wide age difference as the fact that he is a Doctor, a post-graduate who, I believe, has specialised in genetics, and therefore able to call himself a Geneticist. So three people went merrily to London - a Doctor, a Housewife, and a retired Window Cleaner. And we even stayed overnight at the same hotel. There was not a hint of social, national, or racial superiority among any of us during the weekend, but we looked on each other as fully equal. If anything, I probably was the leader, not to make up for my apparent academic deficiency compared to my friend, but out of age and experience.

That is in-keeping with Creationism, as opposed to Evolution which lies behind social class and inequality, as well as being the stigma behind racism and national superiority, all three I had suffered from time to time as a victim throughout life. I recall the 1970's, when I was still young physically, and a lot younger spiritually, that any major clash with fellow church-goers had much to do with social class - a semi-skilled factory machinist thrown into a group of University graduates. Despite their efforts to be social and accepting, somehow in their subconscious, I was never perceived as equal to them. I even offended one of them in an opposing group when I managed to answer correctly a higher proportion of questions from a trivial quiz game. He didn't like that at all!

I have discovered back then that these graduates embraced Theocratic Evolution, that is, Darwinism under the control and supervision of God himself. Notwithstanding the blatant flaw of Adam and Eve having ape-men as ancestors. According to this theory, Adam's parents and grandparents must have been as equally human as they were, and going back quite a number of generations, maybe hundreds of generations. Yet each pre-Adam generation died. They were all mortal. What a contradiction that is to Romans 5:12-14 and 1 Corinthians 15:20-22, where Paul insists that through one man sin has entered into the world, and therefore through one man's sin death came to all men (from Adam onwards). What I have found astonishing is that these young church-goers were graduates, with IQ's higher than mine, strongly supporting their level of education and middle-class standing, yet unable to work out this simple Biblical principle! 

The three of us attended the seminars. It was the first lecture, delivered by Engineer Stuart Burgess, which arose my surprise and amazement. He quoted atheist Richard Dawkins having greater respect for the Young-Earth Creationist who wholeheartedly holds to the literal six-day Creation, than he would to a theologian who embrace Theocratic Evolution. As Dawkins would have insisted - Creation and Evolution are mutually exclusive. One cannot favour one without the compromise of the other. So had Richard Dawkins showed up at our trivial quiz contest, he would have shown a greater respect for me above the others in the same room, much to the shock of all present.

Richard Dawkins.

And so how great minds goes. One of the worst aspects of our culture is the undue respect given to the higher educated, especially when standing at the pulpit. The more clever the professor is, the greater respect he receives. Thus I have seen the most damnable heresy infect the intellect of Christians around me, simply because this particular perpetrator had studied at Cambridge University and "Knows the Bible inside out." He was even referred to as "A prophet of God on the level of Isaiah" by other Christians - even if there's no proof of any Biblical basis for this, and to be fair, the man referred to has never, according to my knowledge, made such an admission about himself. Rather, the honour was bestowed to him by other Christians enamoured by his professionalism. And so the same applies to Darwin's advocates.

One of the most amazing train of thinking among Evolutionists and Atheists is the theory that everything must be subject to Science - the knowledge of man about everything in the world, including Evolution. According to them, Evolution itself remains beneath man's technology. Now if Evolution was an undisputed fact, this would indeed be true. There are scores of records where Evolution had got it wrong: Mutations, redundant organs, disease, mild illnesses, early death, malformations, extinctions, and so forth. For technology to function properly, every part must be fully functional and in its right place. The computer is a good example. Any fault with the internal wiring and the computer would not function. Likewise, if any of the binary digits in the software was misplaced, the program would crash. But for one who believe in Creationism, all these "Evolutionary defects" are more likely the result of the Fall and the Edenic Curse. As testified in the case of both Eve and Sarah, the human genome was at a much more stable condition nearer the time of Creation than at present.

And the lack of adequate reference to the genome was something I felt was missing from the Conference. Because the sheer complexity of the cell and its nucleus would be enough to shatter Evolution altogether. The dizzying complexity of the DNA molecule, the RNA, the Ribosome, the Golgi Apparatus, and many other minuscule parts all playing their role in the production of protein, makes the cell evolving by chance to be mathematically impossible. An example of this was noted by Fred Hoyle, Atheist, Astronomer, and Mathematician. I am aware that I have mentioned this already in recent blogs, but since this is about our inter-class unity at a Creation Ministries Conference, it's well worth giving another mention here.

Hoyle worked out that just part of the protein chain, the enzymes with each of its amino acid parts carefully folded in proper sequence, the chance of such a chain alone evolving by chance is one out of one, followed by 40,000 zeroes! Even the estimated age of the Universe does not come even close! Knowing such a result, instead of acknowledging Intelligent Design, as the Scriptures testify, Hoyle dreamt up the theory that first there was never a Big Bang, rather the Universe has always been eternal, giving the hope that the cell might have evolved elsewhere in the eternal past, and arrived at the primeval Earth embedded in a meteorite in the relatively recent past. Such a theory is known as Panspermia and it seemed to be widely accepted by Evolutionists to this day.

Despite the lack of positive evidence, Evolution continue to be upheld by the learned, and the rank-and-file bow the knee. This includes Social Evolution, the idea that some cultures are more advanced than others, and even the belief of various stages of inequality within a culture. As I see it, the social class divide is evil, just as racism is evil, along with national superiority. As these three were the underlying basis for the Holocaust, when six million Jews were needlessly slain, along with homosexuals and the mentally handicapped. According to the Nazis, such slaughter was based on Evolution, and their own efforts in "giving evolution a helping hand" in the selection of their superior Aryan race.

I have seen that social class divides the church, the evaluating of a person's worth depending on education, wealth and social standing rather than on character and spiritual maturity. The sort of stuff that was also going on during the days of the apostle James. So bad it was, the the apostle gave one of the sternest rebukes, (James 2:1-7) short of the rebukes delivered by Jesus himself (eg, Matthew 23). Believing in Creationism, the Fall, and Redemption is the Great Leveller. As I like to put it: Standing under the Shadow of the Cross. Under such a Shadow, every form of prejudice, favouritism, and personal status just blows away, like shrivelled leaves caught in the wind.

A Doctor, a Housewife, and a Window Cleaner, each Divinely Created, each recognising their own shortcomings, each in need of redemption. This is how all churches should be. Each person seen as one begotten of the Father through faith in Jesus. Each person seen in the same way as God sees him, as one imputed with the righteousness of Christ. Each person in the fellowship seen as possessing eternal life, with Heaven as the eternal home for all. Each person seen with all sin forgiven, therefore having no basis for judgement. The recipe for sweet fellowship and hospitality. No special credit given for higher education, social class, or nationality, nor anyone looked down for lacking any of these.

It's a weekend I will not forget easily. 

Feeling Fearful

What is it like to have someone you love and cherish, and to commit the whole of your life, for better or worse, for richer or poorer, for sickness and in health - to fall ill to the point of inability to sit up, let alone stand up and walk, and to have a continuous searing pain along her spine?

 

How does it feel to have this cherished one loving you, accepting you as you are, being a thorough helpmate, and hold no reserve in exchanging affection, devotion and love - only to find out that as she lies crying and in fear in a bed at one of the nation's top hospitals, we are told by a couple of its doctors that all tests applied proved negative and any attempted treatment, some very costly to the NHS, have not brought on the expected recovery? She is then transferred back to a more local hospital, having no idea of her future outcome. This, I think, is what fear really is. It's of the unknown, the uncertain welfare of my beloved, of our future together as husband and wife and what this could involve.

 

Last night in bed, after her transfer back to Reading from Oxford, I was gripped by cold, naked fear. Alongside this, all the good times we had as a couple, both at home and on our travels, stirred my memory. The house is quiet, even when I'm at home, and when I turn on the telly or listen to music on the hi-fi, these are not real people, just images and past recordings. I don't have the proper feeling of company. Despite the sight of people and the sound of voices, by the end of the day I'm still at home alone.

 

Yet I should be used to this. I lived alone at a bachelor apartment for 23 years. Those were the days of freedom, to come in and go out whenever I wish, to buy what I desire as well as what I need, the ability to work long hours, to save up and travel the world. Also to take a day off if I wanted to (the benefit of self-employment) and if I couldn't be bothered to wash the dishes after a meal but to leave them dirty overnight, there was no one to reprimand me. Bachelor life was good in many ways.

But fourteen years of happy marriage had changed all that. Because as a bachelor, there were times I felt lonely and unloved, along with a good dollop of boredom. Love and marriage had filled in those gaps left unfulfilled as a single. Of course, as in everything else in this fallen world, nothing is perfect, and we had our share of disagreements and woes. But overall, it has always been a strong, robust marriage, each supporting the other during down times as well as celebrating noted moments together. In all of these, I made it my aim to love my wife in the same way Jesus Christ loves his church - sacrificially, with the ability to pass over any shortcomings she has. For an example, as a bachelor I loved independent travel, world backpacking and hosteling. At the same time I shunned package holidays with their luxury hotel accommodation. I also believed back then, that escorted tours were either for the elderly, or for wimps who did not have the bottle to look after themselves in a foreign country. But after marrying Alex, we went on five package holidays, including the Canary Island of Lanzarote, where I booked two escorted coach tours to explore the island.

Backpacking days: Singapore, taken May 1997.

Alex is everything to me. Her love for me and her devotion to our marriage had made a massive impact on my life. Even to the extent that independent travel is now by comparison seen as undesirable. As I sit here alone at home, with the recording of the pop band OMD playing through the high-fidelity speakers, I type this blog with a desire for a good cry. The emptiness, along with the fear of uncertainty, can be almost unbearable.

I call out to God to help us, and for Jesus Christ to save us, but even God seems far away, as if on some sabbatical holiday. When I call out, it is into empty air, with not even an echo to answer back. My feelings, my fears and anticipations are not soothed but continue on, unabated.

It is the time like this that it's so difficult to grasp the reality of Psalm 139, for example. In the opening verses, it reads:
O LORD, you have searched me and you know me. You know when I sit and when I rise; you perceive my thoughts from afar.
You discern my going out and my lying down; you are familiar with all my ways. Before a word is on my tongue you know it completely, O LORD.

Although I know that such words are true, it is times like this, I tend to wonder whether such atheists such as Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchins and Sam Harris may have had a point after all - that all I'm doing whilst praying, is talking into thin air, with the complexity of the vast Universe too large and myself too small and insignificant to be heard, let alone listened to and taking heed. There are times I feel life is like that, a grasshopper walking on a comparatively huge planet orbiting the Sun, which within - compared to the size of the galaxy - even the whole Solar System looks microscopic as it whirls on its orbit around the nucleus of the galaxy. I tend to feel: Is God elsewhere, carefully adjusting and fine-tuning the mechanisms of another more distant galaxy, and too busy to hear a plea from an insignificant guy from across the other side of the Universe?

Times come and times go, and there are moments when I can lift my hands into the air during church praise and worship, feeling the strong presence of the Lord. Then there are times like these, where my pleading does nothing but disturbs the silent, still air in my bedroom, and remains unheeded. Yet believing that God is Infinite, whose wisdom cannot be fathomed by mere mortals such as us, and yes, he could well be fine-tuning the complex fabric of a long distant galaxy, yet at the same time hold together and sustain the life cells of a bug crawling on the carpet, and also looks into our hearts, knowing more about within ourselves then we ourselves do.

These are the times to reflect on the omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence of God Almighty, whose love for us was demonstrated by the crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ to atone for all our transgressions and shortcomings. No matter what the atheists say, it was right here on earth where Jesus atoned for our sins, not on a remote planet at some distant galaxy. God also sustains the very breath of life in our nostrils. As we go about our daily lives, we take for granted that within our chests, each lud-dum, lud-dum, lud-dum, of our beating hearts sends red and white blood cells coursing through our arteries and veins, bringing life to every tissue of our bodies, surely the very proof of the living God.

As we are living in an age of Science, knowledge, including the marvellous mechanism of the genome and microbiology in general, our sinful nature denies God as the Maker and Sustainer of such wonders, and resort to Evolution, with Charles Darwin being the new messiah of the likes of Dawkins and Harris. But it takes distressing times like this that such ideas, false as they might be, offering absolutely no hope, no shred of comfort, no stirring of any other emotion. Rather, Evolution would coldly insist that Alex and her ilk be eliminated from Natural Selection and allowed to die. It is unfortunate that the majority of the medical profession are unbelievers in Christ and of the Atonement, and instead see the wonderful, vastly complex fabric of the genome as having evolved, instead of manifesting the very glory of its Creator. For I believe that God has given mankind an exceptionally intelligent brain which allows study of microbiology and allied sciences to reveal God's glory in creation and to be converted and saved. Yet as they instead remain as unbelievers, we put in our full trust in their knowledge that they can treat such as my wife of a certain illness, and come out mystified, without a diagnosis. And I, for one, fall into despair.

Once again, as I have expressed so enthusiastically in previous blogs, there is that one key verse which Paul wrote in his letter to the church in Rome:
For we know that all things work for the good of those who love God, and are called according to his purpose. Romans 8:28.

And no medical doctor can deny that.

A Warning For All Of Us..

Throughout some previous blogs I might have come across as a "soft" Christian - emphasising eternal salvation, the love of God, his willingness to save, eternal security and such like, all the positive attributes to our faith. All of these are true of course, as I would not promote anything I know to be false. But all this, I suppose were the offshoot of my Roman Catholic upbringing where I was taught that it would have been a lost eternity in Hell if I were to have died with an unconfessed mortal sin in my soul.  In this Catholic faith, nobody had ever enjoyed assurance of their salvation or what followed in the afterlife. If anything, the terrors of Purgatory and Hell had kept millions enslaved to fear during the Middle Ages, with many of the rich and the well-off paying the Church for early release from Purgatory to enter Heaven, while the poorer majority had to bear the full brunt of their penalty.

 

So the Church sold to individuals what was actually a release pass out of Purgatory, known in the faith as an Indulgence. Most indulgences only provided a partial release, that is, a shorter time spent in Purgatory. However, anyone who would willingly sacrifice his own life for either the preservation or promotion of the Catholic faith, would have been granted a Plenary Indulgence with which the martyr would bypass Purgatory altogether and enter straight into Heaven after death. This, for example, gave the motivation for the Crusaders to fight to the death both the Jews and the Muslims while invading the Middle East during the 11th and 12th Centuries to bring the land under the Vatican's control.

 

The Vatican - one time seller of Indulgences.

 

Therefore, it is not too surprising that many have turned against God, believing that his fickleness to save fully and completely, with many shaking their fists in the air, even metaphorically, rather than to commit themselves to the faith. I should know, I once was one of them, and I have personally known others who had discredited God's love or even his existence.

 

Therefore knowledge of God's love, I feel is crucial to some. Certainly I have benefited from such truths after becoming acquainted with the Bible, particularly with the Gospel of John.

But there is the other side of the picture, and that is God is also a consuming fire. And one of his commands to all mankind is not to put God to the test of defiance, although I believe that God would answer favourably the thoughts or questioning of a sincere inquirer. I write this as a result of a post which appeared on Facebook, and perhaps many of you readers might have come across it already, as the posting was set to public.

 

The Case of the Titanic

 

The man who built the largest ocean liner at the time said that not even God was able to sink it. Although neither the Facebook posting nor Google revealed who this man was, I assume he was most likely Thomas Andrews, the Architect who designed the Titanic, one of the three Olympic ships constructed in the early 1900s, with the Titanic being the largest of the three.  When the ship went down in August 1912, he remained on board and perished with it along with over a thousand other passengers. All by being struck and its hull torn by a solid lump of frozen water.

 

But what I have found most striking was that some fourteen years before the tragedy, in 1898 a novelist named Morgan Robertson wrote a novella called Futility, or the Wreck of the Titan - a fiction story of a ship, Titan, which was struck by an iceberg at the calm Atlantic waters during a cold August evening. The incredible similarity between this story, which was published even before the Titanic was thought of, and the real life tragedy, seemed prophetic. The only difference was that Robertson placed his disaster at a slightly different location of the Atlantic to the actual event.

 

Apart from this detail, it is worth asking: Was this novella a supernatural prophecy? If so, was it from God? I'm left only to speculate on this, but Andrews' defiance was a good reflection of the British Empire at the height of it glory. And not surprising, that much of the Empire's prowess was based on its naval strength, especially since the victory gotten from the Battle of Trafalgar in 1805, when the British won the battle against both the French and Spanish naval forces. Since then, The British pride in its own seamanship swelled and the nation believed that they were beyond the Judgement of God. Furthermore, it wasn't long before one English biologist, Charles Darwin, began to write his book which will gradually draw the nation away from the truthfulness of God's revelation while continuing to revel in its pride; On the Origin of Species, a classic which was also the inspiration behind Britain's racial, cultural and national superiority, along with its naval prowess. 

 

The ship Titanic was the very embodiment of the British Empire, with its rigid class structure and opulence for the First Class passengers, in contrast to the dreadful living conditions of the boiler stoking firemen who kept the ship sailing. By contrast to the engine deck, the Grand Stairway was worthy of use by any king or V.I P. and is featured to this day in many Titanic literature. The Grand Stairway was the very epitome of the British upper class, a way of an opulent lifestyle out of reach of the commoner, just as the Grand Stairway was inaccessible to the firemen, as well as the third and second class passengers. Yet it's defiance of God and naval pride had brought its downfall, as the Empire itself became financially unmanageable and was dismantled in the 1960s.

The Case with Celebrities

Marilyn Monroe, an American actress was an icon in the 1950s. Throughout her career starting in the late 1940s and her death in 1962, she had starred in 28 movies, sung 35 songs connected with these movies, appeared in five TV programs between 1953 and 1962, was nominated for 16 awards, including the BAFTA in 1956 and 1958. Her fame spread right across the western world, and she was sixth among the world's greatest female stars.

 

Then, at the end of July 1962 the Holy Spirit inspired the evangelist Billy Graham to appear on one of her TV shows. After preaching to her about her need for Jesus Christ as her saviour, she replied,

I don't need your Jesus Christ!

A week later, on 6th August, she was found dead in her apartment of a drug overdose. There was speculation whether she committed suicide or whether it was an accident or miscalculation. Apparently, despite her stardom, she did feel bouts of depression, therefore making suicide a distinct possibility.

 

The case with Marilyn Monroe has always troubled my heart. She indeed was a beautiful woman and an icon of a celebrity. Yet in my mind I can conjure up her as a newborn, cosseting in her mother's arms, and being breastfed, then laid in her cot to sleep soundly. I imagine her sitting at her baby chair, being spoon fed, with her mother's love flowing from her heart. Marilyn crawling on the floor, perhaps chasing a ball or occupied with some other toy, was so happy in her childhood innocence. It makes me wonder how pursuing a life of celebrity can not only be so detrimental to a person, but be the swelling of pride and self-reliance to the point of shaking the fist of defiance before God, who gave her life in the first place.

Then, there was the case with British band AC/DC rock singer Bon Scott. One of his albums Down the Highway to Hell was released in 1979 after a song he sung which contained these lyrics:
Don't stop me; I'm going down all the way, down the highway to Hell.
In February 19th 1980, Bon Scott was found dead, choked in his own vomit after a heavy drinking session.

 

Then there was ex-Beatle John Lennon. Writer of many songs recorded by the Beatles, his hostility towards Jesus Christ and the Bible was well known. In March 1966, he remarked in an interview:
Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink...We're more popular than Jesus now. I don't know which will go first, rock and roll or Christianity."

Many of his songs were about free sex and rebellion against authority. He also had a particular hatred towards the middle classes who he thought were more aligned with church-goers. One of Paul McCartney's songs, Elena Rigby, released in August 1966 and dedicated to John Lennon, described the pathetic state of a typical English parish church, with the vicar, Father McKensey, burying the body of his very last parishioner, Elena Rigby, and nobody will ever come to hear his sermons again.  In May 1969 Lennon's song The Ballad of John and Yoko used the word "Christ" several times in vain when released, and this might have led to his pre-mature death on the 8th December 1980, when he was shot outside a hotel by Mark Chapman in New York City.

Indeed, our God is a consuming fire, and anyone shaking his fist in defiance has not only placed himself in real danger, but brought in the possibility of sealing his own doom.

The future of Britain?

In one of last week's newspapers, there was a report that the top notch at the Meteorological Office are about to hold a conference in the coming days about our apparent climate change. They want to know the bottom cause of the apparent lack of summers and extreme weather we have been experiencing here in the UK. As with last year, months of summer downpours and torrential rain had not only spoiled the Queen's Diamond Jubilee celebrations but have caused widespread flooding, destroying many homes and businesses, as well as causing havoc in our crop production. And this year a particularly cold March, with daily temperatures hovering at only two degree Celsius, had reduced wheat production by a third, one of our key items of consumption. The result of all this will be rising food prices, as we need to depend more on foreign imports to sustain us. So food prices rise while the national economy remains stagnant, with wages and salaries remaining pegged. Meanwhile, the insurance companies have to keep on doling out coverage to restore property damaged by frequent flooding.

I have my own views, looking at the scientific perspective, but I by no means push these views as dogma. My guess is as good as the guy's next door and I could be way out wrong. But one thing we can be sure of: our lousy summers are caused by an area of atmospheric high pressure sitting over the Artic circle, pushing the Jet stream south of the UK. Normally, during the summer, the Jet stream flows north of the UK, bringing warm, dry sunshine weather. If the stream flows south, as in the case of winter, then we are to experience cooler, wetter weather and unsettled conditions.

I have wondered whether the volcanic heat emission over Iceland might have a connection with the erratic flow of the Jet stream. If such a heat emission is the bottom cause of our miserable summers, who knows, the Icelandic volcanic system may well be the instrument God may use to judge or discipline Britain.

With Iceland strategically placed to the north west of the UK, our nation is in line to become a victim of a major volcanic eruption. Like the one which took place during Spring of 2010, which grounded every UK flight. Because of our lousy climate, holiday trips to the sunshine is a major priority to the average Brit. When a small Icelandic crater blew, thousands, if not millions of trippers had their cherished time ruined. And it could happen again. This time a larger, neighbouring crater could blow. If so, not only would the resulting ash cloud lower the temperature, but devastate all food production, service industries, business and life as a whole. It is a judgement not to be taken lightly!

Our God is a consuming fire, in this case, literally. Although God has made aware of his presence in the heart of every child born, our culture, our academics, our form of education had turned the nation away from him. Darwinism is constantly being plodded out to our kids in school. On the BBC and other TV channels, evolution and uniformitarianism are constantly being promoted. At present, a series, Rise of the Continents, with Iain Stewart presenting a world beginning without the need for a God to interfere. This followed Simon Reece's similar presentation of Australia, and earlier, Brian Cox on the origin of the Universe. Then not to mention Richard Dawkins' famous book, The God Delusion.

Celebrities, and these include academics who make it on to the media, are held with a reverential respect and god-like esteem by the average Briton. Let's face it, worship of the celebrity is the real national religion, a religion which denies Jesus Christ as Lord and instead leaving us to bow our heads, even falling on our knees when a man in a suit walks by. As we push away God from our lives, let us refrain from sticking our two fingers in defiance and maybe God's patience and eternal love may spare this country from judgement.

"Easter Again!" Says the Atheist.

Easter to me is more than seeing off the end of a cold, miserable winter, and seeing and feeling the weather become warmer, the days become longer, and the sun floating higher in the sky rather than briefly hugging the horizon. It is more than putting away the heavy coat, thick woollen jumpers and wellington boots for the next six months or so. Spring brings promises of warmer days, milder nights and the mental images of barbecues on the beach, swimming in the sea, hiking through glorious nature trails and being out in natural surroundings at its best, with the sun beating down as I pull out a bottle of sun lotion from the rucksack...

Except of course, that here in the UK, we Brits need to first head for the airport to fly south to some foreign country to experience all these things. At least this year, the UK winter is prolonged, it's bitterly cold as we are about to enter the month of April, and there are still snow flurries drifting through the air. And the only source of heat is the gas central heating system in our home, the thick duvet over our bed and, not forgetting, my weekly walk to the public sauna.

To the atheist, Easter originated from some ancient pagan festival celebrating the start of new life - the budding of tree leaves, the blossoming of flowers, the lambing season and the promise of fairer weather ahead - and attributed to some god or deity without the scientific knowledge that the two Poles of the Earth are lopsided by some 23 degrees, and as the planet swings around the Sun on its orbit, its tilt being the cause of the seasons.

Little wonder, that deprived of this scientific truth, the ancients worshipped some deity, with the Sun being reborn each day, seen by them as a deity riding across the sky in a fiery chariot.

 

 

Therefore what the ancients believed fuels the atheist's opinion of the ridiculous. But unfortunately, this applies to the Christian faith as well. As a matter of fact, the Christian faith has become the target for the sceptical arrows above all other faiths. Only today I was reading in the Daily Mail newspaper an essay about the decline of the Christian faith in Britain, based on Archbishop Carey's criticism of the Government's endorsement for our faith to be obliterated by the secularists, the latter being the end result of the writings of such authors as Simon Cowel and Richard Dawkins.

For me, of course, the Easter weekend is all about the crucifixion, death and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, which makes Easter the most important holiday of the whole year, more so than Christmas (although the retail outlets may not agree on this.) I firmly believe in the historicity of Jesus, the Jewish Messiah who died on the cross to atone for our sins. Indeed, this is tremendous news - about the God whose love for us is strong enough to put his Son through such agonising suffering. Furthermore, God had given me the wonderful privilege to spend time in the Holy Land, a total of 23 weeks in five separate visits spanning 24 years, with my last visit together with my wife Alex in the year 2000.

Orthodox Jews ushering the Sabbath, 1993

Visiting the Holy Land had brought the Bible to life in such a way that one has to be there for the experience. Back in 1993 for example, and as a lone backpacker back then, I felt my emotions deepen as I stood just outside the forecourt of the Western Wall on a Friday evening, and watching Orthodox Jews celebrate the ushering in of their Sabbath, on a Friday evening during and after sunset, as with the Hebrew clock, the new day always begins at sunset. To me it was Friday, to them, Saturday. Then as I walked the next day through the deserted streets of West Jerusalem, the area of city occupied by Jews, not a car was to be seen, let alone buses and trucks, and every shop closed, along with offices and every private and Government institution. The whole city being empty of life certainly looked as if the whole of mankind was obliterated, leaving the planet's population of zero (or just one - myself.) It was an extraordinary experience, yet a testimony of the truthfulness of the Bible.  And yet, believe it or not, shortly after sunset Saturday, the whole city was alive and bustling like any Saturday afternoon here in the UK. It also seemed strange to me that Sunday was a normal working day right across Israel and the West Bank alike, yet still attended a church service while the shops were busy trading alongside.

Modern Israel is a testimony of the Bible's truthfulness. But as a Christian, I somehow feel apologetic to the atheist about my firm belief and conviction of the Bible. Richard Dawkins, for one, calls the God of the Old Testament the most savage and cruel, infanticidal bully he had ever known. It would be natural for any Christian to wonder how anyone could address God in such a manner. Yet how would I feel or re-act if Dawkins approached me, aware of his excellent knowledge of the Bible?

Take, for example, Numbers 16. From verses 27 through to 34, there is a narrative of the destruction of the families of Korah, Dathan and Abiram. It was these three men who sinned against the Lord although their wives and adult sons most likely co-operated and gave their blessings. But in verse 27 there were mentioned of "little ones" - most likely their grandchildren. Dawkins can argue that these were far too young to understand any implication of their transgression, yet perished screaming with the rest of the family by pure divine justice.

Another striking example of infanticide can be found in 1 Samuel 15:3 where God through Samuel, instructs King Saul to annihilate the whole of the Amalekite nation, not just adult men and women but also children, infants and sucklings too, along with all their livestock. Although King Saul did sin in sparing the livestock, he did obey the Lord in slaying every human being - including infants and sucklings.

Dawkins would have the perfect right to ask me where is the justification in such innocent infants to be slain. He would ask, how was it possible for such children to be slain for the sins their ancestors had committed against Israel? All they were concerned were for their mother's maternal love and comfort and to be breastfed. What does the suckling know about some transgression committed by some great grandfather? It is like saying that both my wife, daughters and myself be punished for the crimes of the Crusaders committed 900 years ago, who happen to be my Mum's ancestors. How would I answer Dawkins?

Then American atheist Sam Harris takes up the issue in questioning the validity of the Bible being God's word by calling into question the measurements of the huge circular bath, or sea, constructed by King Solomon to be set up by the Temple in Jerusalem (1 Kings 7:23, 2 Chronicles 4:2.) Both narratives gives the measurements as ten cubits from rim to rim and thirty cubits in circumference. To Harris, this was the most crudest approximation for PI as it could have ever gotten, a strange thing for Almighty God to give through his inspired writer. Even the ancient Babylonians, a thousand years before Solomon, had a far more accurate approximation for PI than what the Bible allows, according to Harris.

Indeed, Harris would be right. Ten cubits times PI would give a result of over 31.4 cubits, nearly one and a half cubits more than what the Bible had given. But if you look carefully at the above pic, (I know it's rather small - there is little I can do about this) - you will notice a recess just below the rim. If this recess was four inches deep, then the diameter would have been eight inches less than the actual rim. Considering that the measurement would be made much easier if taken at the recess than from the rim itself, assuming that one cubit was 18 inches, this would have given a circumference a tad over 540 inches, or almost exactly thirty cubits. The Bible wasn't too far out after all.

I perhaps can give a plausible answer to Harris on the approximation of PI, but in the New Testament there are issues that would have thrown me back, even to this day. For example, Matthew quotes a prophecy which he says that it was from Jeremiah, but it is actually from Zechariah (Matthew 27:9-10 with Zechariah 11:12-13.) If Matthew wasn't able to check his resources properly, then how could this piece of Scripture be inspired of God? So Harris also asks. True enough, Jeremiah did buy a field (Jeremiah 32:6-9, also 19:1) which might have given enough inspiration for Matthew to quote, nevertheless, the actual quote was from Zechariah, not Jeremiah.

Then there seems to be a disagreement between Mark's and John's accounts on the timing of the crucifixion, an issue which bothers me to this day. Mark has Jesus being nailed on the cross by nine in the morning (15:25) while John has Jesus still before Pilate by noon (19:14) when Pilate cries out, "Behold your king!" According to John, by noon Jesus was still with Pilate, while Luke, like Mark, has Jesus not only on the cross by noon, but also the start of the darkness which was to last three hours, i.e. until three in the afternoon. Luke also recorded the meeting of Jesus with Herod. Even if Herod was in Jerusalem at the time, if Jesus was already on the cross by nine in the morning, then his meeting with Herod must have been brief indeed. Atheists by the likes of Dawkins would have a field day. Given credit that the Sanhedrin had delivered the Lord to Pilate as early as six in the morning, with an hour spent with Herod, both quite plausible, it does not solve the discrepancy between Mark's and John's accounts.

I'll be honest here: If Dawkins, Harris or for that matter, Cowel, confronts me with these issues, I must admit that I'll be at a loss on how to answer them. For me, these are serious issues on which my faith in Christ rests upon. In fact, the Bible is the sole authority on which the whole of the credibility of the Christian faith rests. Our salvation depends on it.

In my blog, Good Friday? I'm Confused, written two years ago, I dealt on when Jesus was crucified, and I advocated a Thursday Crucifixion, based on one sole verse, found in Matthew 12:40. It was Jesus' own saying, tying his duration of his burial to that of the prophet Jonas, who was in the belly of a whale for three days and three nights. At the Good Friday service, one of the Elders mentioned in his sermon that in two days time we would be back here (in the church building) to celebrate his resurrection. Two days from Friday. In Hebrew numeracy, there is no zero. Therefore Friday itself would have been counted as day one, Saturday as day two, and Sunday as day three, even if the day began at sundown Saturday, giving a complete first twelve hours of Sunday for Jesus to remain entombed. But even with no zero in Hebrew counting, this does not add up to three nights as well, as there would have been only Friday night and Saturday night (or Saturday morning and Sunday morning, both before sunrise.) A Thursday crucifixion makes better sense, but this does not only go against the grain of my church at Ascot, but the whole of Christian tradition. Another area where the atheist would have had his day.

But also in the Bible there is much to credit for its inspiration. Just read Psalm 22, Isaiah 53 along with Zechariah 9:9 and others. There was no way that these writers imagined the future from their standpoint without divine inspiration. Despite some difficult bits, the Bible is still trustworthy and the Holy Word of God. And because of it we can trust the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for our salvation and celebrate Easter as well.

Happy Easter to you all.

*******************************************************************************

Any comments shedding light to the issues mentioned above would be most welcome. True, I have a modification system set up, but this is to keep out advertisers (e.g. Click on this link to see my great product etc.) and it's is not to discourage discussion. God bless.