Tag: Culture

The Rise & Triumph of the Modern Self – A Reflective Response

This has taken me far far longer than I intended it to take, and far longer than it should have taken. It’s not a short book (407 pages) and it isn’t a particularly easy book to read. It isn’t a lightweight book. It isn’t a cheap book. I’ve been told Dr Trueman is working on a briefer more accessible edition. I think that’s good, and bad. Good because more people might read it than otherwise, but bad because so much will need to be left out in order to fit the brief. An idea might be to produce a Study Guide – perhaps on its own. That, I think, would be helpful, perhaps to use in a church setting or reading group. Anyway, I’ve read the book. Having read it, I really could do with reading it again.

After saying that, It’s not my purpose here to review the book, others have done that already. But what I want to do is share some thoughts I had as I was reading it. As I say then, this post is more response than review. I do need to say that this is an absolutely brilliant book. If I get to meet him I ought to thank him for writing it. It is well written. I like his style. It’s divided up well with plenty of headings. It has an index, and footnotes. so what’s not to like. It’s a significant book. It’s a book that should be read by Christians, and especially ministers, seeking to understand not just where we are, but how we arrived at such a juncture.

What struck me most powerfully is the momentous task we face. This was my thinking very early on  as I read, some of which are picked up in the last section of the book – more of that later. The realisation that the ‘cultural moment‘ isn’t a moment at all but is in fact two or three hundred years of movement away from God and his authority. In the West that is anyway. Yes, there have been revivals, and I do not want to minimise them at all, but the trend continues downward. And the trend is not just down, but is picking up speed as well.

I don’t know how true this is (perhaps someone can tell me) but I was told by a friend (no longer with us) that Dr Lloyd-Jones told him that the length of time it takes to get ill, is the length of time it takes to (fully) recover. If that is true of individuals, could it also be true of churches, and of the ills of society? and maybe of Nations too – unless there is a Revolution (or a Reformation) when everything can change. So bearing that in mind will give you some idea of what we are facing. The Catholic church and Islam do not think in moments, but in centuries. Perhaps us Protestants need to have a more realistic perspective of time.

Another analogy I thought of is the Oil Tanker. Once the decision is made to turn round, or to stop, it can take a very long time to for anything happen. Although with that analogy we may be completely unaware the command to stop, or to turn, has already been given. This may be the case. The command has been given, but to us everything goes on as before. Rather, it seems as if everything is going on as before. From our perspective then it’s still moving and it seems as though nothing has changed. But in reality everything may have already changed. We just aren’t aware of it yet. The command to turn may have been given. That’s an encouraging thought. Obviously, the Command I’m talking of here is that given by God.

Encouraging as that thought may be, and it is, the reality is that revival may not come (for us) and God may not intervene in any obvious way at all. When we read of the past it’s sobering to realise the culture still has a very long way down to go, and despite us thinking how bad it is, and it is, it has not yet reached the bottom. When will that be? No one can say. No one can say what is at the bottom either. Carl does make a comment in a footnote, about the culture destroying itself. You would’ve thought we would be crying out to God for help. I don’t see too much of this happening.

How are we then to respond?

In writing to our MP’s, for example, we will have to realise making logical arguments isn’t going to cut it. Here in Wales (and the UK in general) the Assembly are absolutely committed to pursuing policies that push a Transgender ideology. Biology makes no difference now. Even in the church making rational arguments sometimes makes no headway against someone saying ‘how it makes me feel.’ If that’s where we are in the church how can we expect arguments with godless governments to be any more effective! Perhaps, and I’m being quite serious, when we write to our MP’s we need to sprinkle our letters or emails with several references to how it makes us feel. Not a very good idea but surely when we see truth trampled in the street it makes us feel something. Doesn’t it? To illustrate where we are at I’ve typed up a few quotes from Carls book. These are mainly in the last section:

‘Yet transgenderism is only the latest and most extreme form of this move; it stands in obvious continuity with antimetaphysical thought of the nineteenth century, most notably Friedrich Nietzsche. Transgenderism is a symptom, not a cause. It is not the reason why gender categories are now so confused; it is rather a function of a world in which the collapse of metaphysics and of stable discourse has created such chaos that not even the most basic of binaries, that between male and female, can any longer lay claim to meaningful objective status. And the roots of this pathology lie deep within the intellectual traditions of the West.
The contemporary debates surrounding LGBTQ+ also offer evidence of Alasdair Macintyres contention that ethical debate today is not about reasoning from commonly accepted premises but rather about the expression of emotional preferences.’ Page 376.

‘The agreed rational basis for debate has gone. All that is left is emotional preference.’ P. 377.

‘But as i noted in the introduction, this book is neither a lament nor a polemic. It is rather an attempt to explain how the revolution of the self came to take the form it has in the West and why that is so culturally significant.’ Page. 382.

‘It should also enable us to have a better understanding of why the sexual revolution has apparently moved so fast and, if anything, appears to be gaining speed, as transgenderism seems to be making such headway in the culture and as one after another sexual taboo collapses in the face of what often looks like an unstoppable tidal wave of sexual revolution. The reason for this speed is that the underlying causes of these phenomena are deeply embedded within our culture and have been slowly but surely transforming how we think of ourselves and our world for many, many generations.’ Page, 386.

The book sets where we are in context, and I think sets before us an overwhelming and impossible task. That was my response as I read it. Even after reading this book, we still believe ‘the arm of flesh’ will deliver us. My friends, it will not. The ‘arm of flesh’ will not undo 300 years of movement away from God. And ‘the arm of flesh’ will not undo where we are now. That’s one reason why we need to be reading and hearing about what God has done in the past.  I’m reminded of something Leonard Ravenhill said: ‘The answer isn’t in the White House (or Downing Street), it’s in God’s house.’ It doesn’t mean we stop reading books like this, or stop writing to our MP’s, or engaging where we are able (The Lord does use means), but it does mean we have to face up to the current situation – or the cultural moment that we find ourselves in. When chatting to someone recently I was reminded of Isaiah 42:13:

‘I will work, and none shall prevent it.’

I will work, and who shall let it? as when he wrought the work of creation, there was no opposition to it, or hinderance of him; and in providence all things are done as he pleases; so all his purposes and decrees, which are his works within him, are exactly accomplished according to his pleasure, and none can resist his will. The work of redemption is finished just according to the draught of it in his eternal mind; and when he works upon the heart of a sinner at conversion, whatever obstructions and difficulties are in the way, these are removed, and the work is begun, and carried on, and performed, until the day of Christ. The work of the Lord in his churches, and the setting up of his kingdom in the world, in a more visible and glorious manner, shall be done, and none will be able to hinder it: (John Gill)

Let us not forget, or be tempted to forget that God is at work even when we cannot see it. The Gospel is the power of God unto Salvation!

 

Defining Evangelicalism?

Defining Evangelicalism?
by
Michael J. Iliff
(Any errors below are all mine)

What follows was first written back in 2007 (ish) and I’ve reproduced it here with a few changes in the hope that it makes sense. Some of the references might be a bit dated and some of the links are (sadly) no longer available, but, the point is to show that recent articles (or blog posts) on trying to define Evangelicalism is nothing new.

Evangelical[1] is, or can be, difficult to define, particularly when it has been suggested[2] that the term be dropped.  The word, whilst retaining a much older meaning,[3] has become so broad – it is said – to be of little or of no real value, and as regards any historic definition, become almost meaningless.  Evangelicalism is seen to be in crisis – at least definitionally. Is there any basis to this?  When one considers just a few titles[4] there is the impression of crisis. The evangelical umbrella has continued to widen, with several theologians, or popular figures, such as Clark Pinnock,[5] and Steve Chalke,[6] still[7] broadly viewed as evangelicals. They continue to write for evangelical publications, even though they have moved away from historic[8] orthodox teaching.

In 1992 Michael Horton[9] wrote,

‘Labels are often confusing, especially when the jar’s content changes. Grape juice can become vinegar over the years in the cellar, but the label doesn’t change with the changes in the substance.  The same is true of the term “evangelical.”’[10]

Evangelicals are finding it increasingly difficult to define themselves. Horton writing, again in 1992 said,

‘A number of evangelical leaders met at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School near Chicago two years ago for the purpose of defining the term “evangelical”, but many left as confused concerning what that label comprehends as they were when they arrived. It is becoming increasingly difficult to say what an evangelical is and is not.’[11]

John R de Witt[12] lists seven particulars of Reformed evangelicalism, rather than the Quadrilateral David Bebbington[13] suggests describing Evangelicalism as a whole.  de Witt calls this The Reformed Faith, not Reformed Evangelicalism.  Nevertheless, those of the Reformed Faith are Evangelicals, but not all evangelicals are Reformed.  For Reformed Christians the word ‘evangelical’ is packed with historic and Biblical meaning rather than an academic description[14] of a particular religious movement beginning in the 18th Century.  The distinction is between the reality of the evangelical movement, and Evangelicalism as understood by the Reformed Churches.  De Witt’s seven points are:

    1. The doctrine of scripture.
    2. The sovereignty of God.
    3. The grace of God.
    4. The Christian life.
    5. The law and gospel.
    6. The kingdom of God.
    7. Preaching.

Evangelical Times ran a series[15] of articles with the title ‘What is a Reformed Church’.

The Reformed Evangelical position is well summarised by the five Solas of the Reformation.  These are, “Sola Scriptura, Sola Fide, Sola Gratia, Soli Christus, Soli Deo Gloria”[16]. I don’t believe Reformed Evangelicalism can be summed up and categorised in quite the way David Bebbington describes Evangelicalism as a whole.  In 1977 Evangelical Times printed an article[17] that tried to answer the very same question that is being asked today in 2022 – What is an Evangelical? It’s been an ongoing problem for Reformed Evangelicals.  Lloyd-Jones addressed this same problem of definition in 1971 at the International Fellowship of Evangelical Students – reprinted as late as 1992.  Under a subheading, ‘Succumbing to the Ecumenical Spirit’, we read the following,

‘…there is the … danger… of being so broad, so wide, and so loose that in the end we have no definitions at all.  As I see things today, this is perhaps the greater danger because we are living in what is called the ecumenical age.’[18]

In 1996 The Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals (ACE) issued ‘The Cambridge Declaration’[19] calling Evangelical churches to repentance and a return to Reformation theology.  The Alliance, although primarily American,[20] through Evangelical Times published[21] the ‘Declaration’ in full, taking up a centre page spread.  Restating the “five Solas” it lamented the current condition within Evangelicalism. The opening statement of the ‘Declaration’[22] describes churches as dominated by the spirit of the age and changes to how evangelical is defined.

Whatever happened to the Reformation[23] urges readers ‘to turn to the theology of the Reformers’,[24] and is described as more ‘hard-hitting and to the point’[25] than other books and ‘as the title indicates, the problem with modern evangelicalism is its complete abandonment of all the Reformation stood for.  It has cut its ties with the Reformation and is like a ship adrift on stormy seas’.[26] With no clear alternative ‘Evangelical’ will continue to be used albeit with a defining hyphenation.

Moving forward to June 2005 in Evangelicals Now, evangelicalism appears to be no further forward.  Jonathan Stephen[27] writes,

‘…there is currently a huge crisis in evangelicalism …the term itself has become virtually meaningless. Virtually every conceivable religious deviation can now shelter under the umbrella of evangelicalism, if it so wishes’.[28]

However, it does appear that Dr Bebbington’s[29] four-point definition[30](Bebbington’s Quadrilateral) has become a commonly used umbrella term, even though many Reformed churches may find it a difficult and unsatisfactory category, as it falls short in addressing the distinctiveness of Reformed churches. Evangelical then, has a much longer history than what is presented to us in the Tele-evangelism found in America. You’ll get no argument from me about continued vigilance over usage and commentary on its abuse, but I see no reason why historic Evangelicals should abandon it. However, we, Evangelicals, should perhaps, be more careful how we use and abuse it ourselves and continue, or switch to, maybe, hyphenating it as ‘Reformed’ – Evangelical.

As a late addition: In 2006 Geoff Thomas gave two lectures in Rugby on Evangelicalism (Especially Part 2). Both well worth a listen. Evangelicalism: What’s in a Name – Part 1 & Part 2. ‘I’m not going to give it up because other people have abused it (Geoff Thomas Part 2).’ In fact you’d be much better off listening to these two lectures by Geoff! The links for these work.

[1] According to Strongs: G2097 εὐαγγελίζω – euaggelizō – yoo-ang-ghel-id’-zo

From G2095 and G32; to announce good news (“evangelize”) especially the gospel: – declare, bring (declare, show) glad (good) tidings, preach (the gospel).  Translated Preach/Preaching & Gospel/Good News

G2098 εὐαγγέλιον – euaggelion – yoo-ang-ghel’-ee-on

From the same as G2097; a good message, that is, the gospel: – gospel.  Translated Gospel.

For a more comprehensive definition see Thayer.  Available on e-sword.

[2] See Hart, D. G.  Deconstructing Evangelicalism: Conservative Protestantism in the Age of Billy Graham.  2004.  Baker Academic.  Grand Rapids.  R. C. Sproul has been heard to say the same, but no reference is available at this moment.

[3] Iain Murray writes: ‘Evangelion (that we call the gospel) is a Greek word; and signifieth good, merry, glad and joyful tidings, that maketh him sing, dance and leap for joy.  So Tyndale wrote in 1525, and at the same period all who so thought became described as ‘gospellers’ or, less commonly, as ‘evangelicals’.  Over two hundred years later it was the latter term that was to pass into more permanent usage at the time of the ‘Evangelical Revival’.  That it did not do so earlier is largely due to the fact that all the churches of the Reformation were ‘of the gospel’ in their creeds and confessions.  By the eighteenth century, however, while the profession of the national churches in England and Scotland remained orthodox there were many pulpits from which no gospel was heard and when the evangel was recovered a term was necessary to distinguish its preachers from others: they were the ‘evangelicals’.  Murray, Iain H.  Evangelicalism Divided.  2000.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh. p. 1.

[4] A small selection of titles: Armstrong, John.  (Ed.)  The Coming Evangelical Crisis.  1996.  Moody Press.  Chicago; Armstrong, John.  (Ed.)  The Compromised Church.  1998.  Crossway Books.  Wheaton; Glover, Peter C.  The Virtual Church and How to Avoid it.  2004.  Xulon Press; Johnson, Gary L. W. & Fowler White, R.  (Eds.)  Whatever Happened to the Reformation?  2001.  P & R Publishing.  Philipsburg, New Jersey; MacArthur Jr, John F.  Ashamed of the Gospel: When the Church Becomes like the World.  1993.  Crossway Books.  Nottingham; Murray, Iain H.  Evangelicalism Divided.  2000.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh; Phillips, Richard.  Turning Back the Darkness.  2002.  Crossway Books.  Wheaton.

[5] Pinnock holds to and promotes the doctrine of Open Theism.  For a larger treatment of this topic see: Ware, Bruce.  in Johnson, Gary L. W. & Fowler White, R.  (Eds.)  Whatever Happened to the Reformation?  2001.  P & R Publishing.  Philipsburg, New Jersey. P. 95 – 131.

[6] This refers to the recent controversy over penal substitutionary atonement as expressed by Steve Chalke in his book The Lost Message of Jesus.  Reviews of this book are available by searching the ET & EN websites. Also see Evangelicals Now September 2005 for a review of ‘The EA Symposium – Conference on the Cross’ by Mathew Mason.  Mason writes, ‘it is also sad that EA appears willing to permit people who deny a core evangelical belief to continue as members’.  Available: http://www.e-n.org.uk/3129-Conference-on-the-cross.htm

[7] ‘The Evangelical Alliance has so far failed [at the time of my writing] to act with regard to Steve Chalke’.  EN Jonathan Stevens.  There is also no sign of this happening at the Alliance Website. Available: http://www.eauk.org/theology/headline_issues/atonement/atonement-statement.cfm

[8] See a previous footnote.  Three people in three different areas of theology will demonstrate this and why they compromise evangelical theology.  Briefly, the names of three people; John Stott on eternal punishment; Clark Pinnock on Divine Foreknowledge and Steve Chalke on the Atonement.  In addition to this, more recently, ‘The New Perspective on Paul’ (e.g. Bishop Tom Wright) has caused concern.

[9] The Rev. Dr. Michael S. Horton is the J. Gresham Machen professor of systematic theology and apologetics at Westminster Seminary California. He is the main host of The White Horse Inn radio broadcast and editor-in-chief of Modern Reformation magazine. He received his M.A. from Westminster Seminary California, his Ph.D. from Wycliffe Hall, Oxford and the University of Coventry, and also completed a Research Fellowship at Yale University Divinity School.  Dr. Horton is the author/editor of more than fifteen books.  Available: http://www.whitehorseinn.org/about.htm

[10] Horton, Michael S. ‘What is an Evangelical?’ Available: http://www.christianity.com/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID560462|CIID1415584,00.html.

[11] Horton, Michael S.  ‘Evangelical Arminians: Option or Oxymoron?’  Available: http://www.modernreformation.org/mr92/mayjun/mr9203oxymoron.html (21/04/03).

[12] de Witt, John R.  What is the Reformed Faith?  1981.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh.

[13] Bebbington, D W.  Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A history from the 1730s to the 1980s.  Routledge.  London and New York.  2000.  The four are: Biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible (e.g. all spiritual truth is to be found in its pages); Crucicentrism, a focus on the atoning work of Christ on the cross; Conversionism, the belief that human beings need to be converted; and Activism, the belief that the gospel needs to be expressed in effort.  Pp. 2 – 17.  Or, as on page 3, Bebbington puts it: ‘Together they form a quadrilateral (the underlining is my Emphasis) of priorities that is the basis of Evangelicalism’.

[14]  Hart, D. G.  Deconstructing Evangelicalism: Conservative Protestantism in the Age of Billy Graham.  2004.  Baker Academic.  Grand Rapids.  Hart argues the popular usage of the word ‘evangelicalism’ is a modern academic construct.

[15] ET. November 1996 – February 1997.

[16] Or, scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, through Christ alone, to the glory of God alone.  We may also add to this the TULIP acrostic.  Also see Appendix 2, The Cambridge Declaration for an elaboration of the Solas of the Reformation.

[17] Evangelical Times. July 1977. p. 15 & 4.  ‘Who are we?  What is an evangelical?  Tell us somebody please!’  This was a report on the NEAC conference of that year.  The report in ET began by saying ‘It comes up here, it comes up there, the issue comes up everywhere.  Some duck it, some face it.  Some dismiss it, some debate it.  It is the burning issue of: ‘what is an evangelical?’’

[18] Lloyd-Jones, D.M.  What is an Evangelical?  1992.  The Banner of Truth Trust.  Edinburgh.  P. 22.

[19] The ‘Cambridge Declaration’ is essentially a restatement of the five Solas of the Reformation.  The full text of this document is available at: http://www.alliancenet.org/CC_Content_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID581262|CIID,00.html

[20] Now also has UK members on the council.

[21] Evangelical Times, December, 1996, p 12 – 13.

[22] See Appendix 2 for the Declaration in full.

[23] Johnson, Gary L. W. & Fowler White, R.  (Eds.)  Whatever Happened to the Reformation?  2001.  P & R Publishing.  Philipsburg, New Jersey.

[24] From the Alliance bookstall: http://www.reformationalresources.org/merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=RR&Product_Code=B-JOHNS-1

[25] Hanko, Herman C.  PRT Journal.  Vol 35, No.2, April 2002.  Book Reviews.  Review of ‘Whatever Happened to the Reformation’  Available: http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr2002.html#WhateverHappened

[26] Hanko, Herman C.  PRT Journal.  Vol 35, No.2, April 2002.  Book Reviews.  Review of ‘Whatever Happened to the Reformation’  Available: http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr2002.html#WhateverHappened

[27] Jonathan Stephens was for many years the Pastor of Carey Baptist Church, Reading, and combined this with becoming President of the Fellowship of Independent Evangelical Churches.  He also became General Secretary of the BEC, changing to Affinity under his leadership.  He is presently Principal of the Evangelical College of Wales (Bryntirion).

[28] Stephens, Jonathan.  Evangelicals Now, June 2005, ‘The current crisis in evangelicalism’.  Available:  http://www.e-n.org.uk/2005-06/3026-The-current-crisis-in-evangelicalism.htm

[29] http://paulhelmsdeep.blogspot.com/2007/08/calvin-am-toplady-and-bebbington-thesis.html

[30] David Bebbington continues to use his four-point definition in his latest book THE DOMINANCE OF EVANGELICALISM: The Age of Spurgeon and Moody.

On Supporting Christian Bookshops

On Supporting Christian Bookshops

I’ve come to believe that Christians ought to support their ‘local’ Christian Bookshop. At least more than they do already. I put local there in ‘quotation marks’ because ‘local’ doesn’t necessarily mean where you live anymore (see below).

Bookshops are Closing

Speaking to a rep recently I learnt first-hand that Christian Bookshops are closing all over the place. At least two not so far away have closed. The rep I spoke to used to supply them, but not anymore. When I’ve been serving in the shop, customers here on holiday are thankful we are open. Why? Because ‘the one near us has closed’ they say. It’s not uncommon to hear that. Local Christian bookshops are closing!

As a Christian book buyer, I have used Amazon, like many of you, quite extensively. I’ve bought a lot of books from them. Two things have changed my thinking on this.

The Amazon Factor

The first was when they (Amazon) banned Ryan T Andersons book (When Harry became Sally) from their website. In fact, it looks like just about everyone of the main booksellers (e.g. Smiths & Waterstones) in the UK have followed their lead. To my knowledge, you still can’t buy it anywhere over here. However, I ‘read’ it on Audio, but on principle I’d buy a copy if I could get hold of one – from a Christian bookstore. I admit, some books you just can’t find anywhere else but on Amazon so I’m not advocating a ban. They have huge buying power and independent bookstores find it difficult to compete. Actually, it’s virtually impossible to compete on price – though on rare occasions it can happen. Things have changed, or become clearer. Despite the convenience, and they are convenient, Amazon are not our (Christians) friends. It’s that simple.

The Community Factor

The second reason was an article I read some months ago about local bookshops. This was in the US, but the principle was the same. The principle being that as a local business they supported the local community. The article demonstrated how they slotted into the life of wherever it is they are situated. Like everything in the US, as my Dad used to say, is BIG. So I think a small bookshop over here cannot compare to small over there. Context is everything I guess. The principle holds though. Small over here does more often than not mean small.

Providential Bookshops

The Bookshop in Rugby

In addition to that, was my own experience that hadn’t quite registered until very recently. When I first became a Christian through the witness of a friend one of the things I realised was that we needed to get Bibles and find a church. As strange as it may seem, we thought we were the only Christians in the town (we can discuss that another time). Here’s the thing, somehow or other, I knew there was a Christian bookshop in the town. So with my raggy old jeans and unkempt beard I made my way to the Christian bookshop in Castle Street, Rugby. (As far as I know it’s still open.) I went in, held my hands up in the air and proclaimed, ‘I’m Saved!’ Wally then proceeded to tell me of a church where I would get good teaching. And he sold me a Bible. That’s why (and how) I went to Railway Terrace (Evangelical Free Church) where Peter Jeffery was the Pastor. Going there was absolutely foundational to my Christian life. I can’t stress that enough! Isn’t the providence of God amazing!

Then Sue, my first wife, through the witness of a friend, in great distress went into her local Christian bookshop in Leamington (now closed). There she met David Arnold, a lifelong friendship emerged through this – especially with their daughter Ruth. David was an elder in the church in Rugby. Funny that isn’t it. Sue started attending the church in Rugby with David & Fi and their family. We then met at the church and were married, and the rest as they say is history. Isn’t the providence of God a wonderful thing!

The Conclusion of the Matter

The point being, as I said to someone recently, is that bookshops are ‘more than the sum of their parts.’ Here in Aberystwyth, we get people come in that just want to talk. It isn’t always convenient, true, but they come in. If Christian bookshops aren’t there no one can come into them. We are just a tiny tiny part in the scheme of things. But in the providence of God, we are a part. Like most Christian bookshops, we aren’t just a shop – it’s a ministry.

Here’s my conclusion then, and something for us all to consider: If you, we, don’t buy our Christian books from local Christian bookshops they will close. It’s that simple.

Paradise PD – A slightly different Christian perspective

There is outrage, again, over the Netflix production ‘Paradise PD’ that blasphemes the Lord Jesus Christ. Is it blasphemous? Yes. Is it offensive? Yes. Do I like it? I haven’t seen it, but probably not. Will I watch it? Unlikely. Though I might if I had to. By the way, I didn’t even realise this was a series and in its 4th season. I’m guessing the series have a pop at everyone – hmmm, maybe not everyone (you know).

I accept the moral outrage by Christians but I’d like to come at the episode, what I know of it anyway, from a different perspective. Let me just say, because it probably needs saying, I’m not endorsing it in any way shape or form, just looking at it from a slightly different perspective. 

Remember the old ‘The end is nigh’ sandwich boards of the past. They ridiculed it, but you know, the end really is nigh. It’s a true statement. Messiah-Nara might be meant to ridicule and be funny, but actually it’s a statement of truth. It will be the end for His enemies.

What ought to be fascinating is the fact that Jesus just won’t go away. The usual tactic then is to ridicule him. They tried that in the New Testament so doing it this way is nothing new. We ought to be encouraged because they are still doing it. It didn’t work then, and it won’t work now. Here’s a few things about this episode that I know from the criticisms. Like I say, I haven’t seen it, so what I say here isn’t personally verified. I wonder if the writers of this episode know more than they are letting on. My speculation is that they could be, or at least have first hand knowledge of evangelicalism. They’ve been influenced by self-righteous controlling church leaders. Maybe in a bizarre way this episode is a cry for help. Here are a few points then not in any particular order.

Free Speech

I need to say this. I believe in free speech. If they want to produce this episode that is their right to do so. However blasphemous it might be. I don’t have to like it to allow them the right to produce it but free speech also gives the right to protest against it. I rarely sign petitions. There is a petition to take it down, but honestly, I don’t think I’ll be signing it. There are many petitions out there wanting to ban Christian stuff as well. I don’t see too many petitions against heavily polititicised LGBTQ stuff which is far more insidious that this film. I think the petition in this case will just make more people want to see it. In a way it’s self defeating. But I understand the outrage.

The Cross

The picture shows Jesus breaking the cross and the nails turning into Uzi’s (Probably 9mm). Of course there is a mixture of fact and fiction but nevertheless it shows Jesus victoriously breaking the cross and wreaking judgment on his enemies. Jesus could have come off the cross, but then there would be no salvation. So that didn’t happen. But think about how Aslan in the Narnia story after the White Witch and all her host had done their worst and killed Aslan, what happened? Aslan breaks the stone table and is victorious. The story is playing out the reality of Jesus’ victory. The Bible tells us that he triumphed over his enemies through the cross.

The greatest possible symbol of weakness becomes the greatest symbol of victory and of power. So that he has put to shame all powers through the cross. We might not like the picture but actually, intended or not, we see a triumphant Messiah.

A Fallen World

Because we live in a fallen world we should expect to see this sort of stuff. It’s everywhere really. This show is a bit more in your face but it just proves the truth that we are rebellious against our creator. It’s a form of imprisonment, they can’t help themselves. We can’t help ourselves. Which is exactly why we need a Saviour. And the only way we can be saved is through Jesus dying on a cross. So in an unintended way the film demonstrates our own fallenness and of our need for a Saviour.

Final Judgement

Jesus is crucified as the Lamb. But in revelation we read about ‘the day of his wrath.’ The Lamb is mighty. And all his enemies will be dealt with. Being slaughtered using a pair of Uzi 9mm’s will seem a mercy when considering the awful reality of an eternal lake of fire. People will be laughing, I’m sure, but it’s not a laughing matter. The enemies of The Lord and His anointed one (Messiah) will be destroyed.

True Knowledge

The film shows an underlying knowledge that not only is there a real Jesus, but also a real knowledge that there is a judgment to come. This episode, and those like it, demonstrate how the truth is actively being suppressed as the bible teaches. Not only does the bible teach it but we know it to be true. Our consciences tell us it’s true. The conscience of the series tell them it’s true as well. Try as they might, Jesus is not going away. He can’t be got rid of so he must be mocked.

True Forgiveness

I was thinking how outraged we can get. Then I wondered how The Lord Jesus reacted to His own crucifixion. We get all pious and outraged but Jesus said ‘Father forgive them for they know not what they do.’ I can think of things I said about Him before God had mercy on me. The foul blasphemies that poured out against the Lord Jesus from my unrighteous lips! But He had mercy on me. Someone prayed for me. Someone told me the Gospel. Jesus saved me. The amazing good news is that Jesus saves all who will call on Him. Will you call on Him?

A Mighty Christ (Messiah)

I’ll just end with this. Maybe you watch the series, and you’ve seen the episode about Jesus and the Cross. I’d ask you to consider the points I’ve tried to make. This Jesus who just won’t go away is going to return to judge the world, to judge you. Then, the choices we have made about The Lord Jesus will have eternal consequences. So I ask you to consider Him.

‘Consider him who endured from sinners such hostility against himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted (Heb 12:3).

Mighty Christ from time eternal,
Mighty, he man’s nature takes,
Mighty, when on Calv’ry dying,
Mighty, death itself He breaks.
See His might,
Infinite,
King of Heaven and earth by right!

Mighty was He in heaven’s purpose,
Mighty, in the pledge to save,
Mighty, from His birth to Calv’ry,
Mighty, bursting from the grave.
Still will He
Mighty be When things hidden now we see.

Great my Jesus in His Person.
Great as God and man is He,
Great His comeliness and beauty,
White and ruddy, fair to see,
Great that sight,
Sovereign Might,
Throned secure on heaven’s height!

vv. 1 & 3 Titus Lewis, 1773 – 1811;
v. 2, Anonymous;
tr. Graham Stuart Harrison 1935 – 2013 (No. 117 Christian Hymns, E.M.W)

Behavioural Science (in the UK) & The Gospel Invitation

These ideas have been knocking around in my mind for a while now, but I heard recently on talkRADIO someone mention, for the first time anywhere, The Behavioural Science Unit. I was beginning to think I was the only one that had ever heard about this. It’s also called ‘Nudging.’ There is a unit (in government) that is actively engaged, using these techniques, in manipulating the behaviour of the population. That’s us. So I have stood back and observed, over the past year or so, our behaviour being manipulated. There is active coercion happening.

Many of you might not know what ‘Nudging’ is. Some time ago The BBC had a program on ‘The Power of Nudge‘, and it was quite astonishing. The reason I know about this is because I listened to it at the time of its first broadcast. Quote: ‘What really changes people’s minds (about the idea of nudging) is because it works.’ This was part of a series on ‘The Pursuit of Power’ in case you think I’ve gone crazy. This was a part of a Behavioural Science unit in No 10 when David Cameron was PM. (This unit is now independent and is called ‘The Behavioural Insights Team’ or ‘Nudge Unit’ –  https://www.bi.team/bit10/  They still use Nudging) The original unit had a sunset clause attached to it, set at 2 years in case it didn’t work. But it did and does work. The UK (and other countries) are now (as I see it) a huge experimental ‘Petri Dish’ of behavioural management and control. I’m sure there are other such Units. Is it a conspiracy then, if it’s happening.

Incidentally, Dr John Lee (Professor of Pathology) in his video (HERE) (dated 1st May 2021) mentions The Behavioural Insight Team (from 30m) that uses FEAR to manipulate the population. I watched this on 4th May 2021. Again, this is clear evidence that we are being manipulated (as if we didn’t already know). This is not something to cast off as something only a few conspiracy nutcases believe – because it’s really happening.
I wonder if advertisers used these techniques whether they’d be legal. Subliminal advertising is illegal, even though the jury is out on its actual effectiveness. Nudging really does work though.

There’s a Vaccine advert that has been running (ad nauseam) quite regularly on talkRADIO and is, I think, a typical use of nudging. Remember, nudging works. That’s why they do it. In the advert we are told to ‘Join the millions already vaccinated…. Every vaccination gives us hope.‘ There are other Ads, but the point is to move us, or nudge us, into action. To manipulate our behaviour. And you can’t miss all the signs everywhere to reinforce the behaviour (social distancing & masks). By the way, I’m not making any comment on taking the vaccine, or not. Merely that ‘Nudging’ works. I didn’t catch who it was and only caught the last part of an interview (some weeks ago now) on talkRADIO but I think it was an MP that said he was ‘surprised at how easily people gave up their liberties.’

It’s inconceivable there is only one of these businesses operating. The Big Tech companies are doing it all the time. Sometimes by withholding information, at other times by using targeted information, at other times by taking down information that doesn’t fit the narrative. Did you see the film ‘The Social Dilemma’? Maybe you thought it was an exaggeration. Perhaps, to some degree. But the point is it’s happening. Whatever your view of President Trump is or was, it comes to something when Tech Companies can pretty much silence the President of the US.

As we appear to have some sort of end (to the pandemic, not the aftermath) to this madness what’s the point in saying all this now? The point is this: don’t think the behavioural insight team, and other such teams, will be clearing their desks and closing down the office as the crisis comes to an end. I think that would be unbelievably naive. No, the ‘insights’ gained through this will be used in other ways (I’ll leave those other ways to your imagination) to manipulate the population into other behaviours (or beliefs). The trick is, of course, to do it a) without us realising it and/or b) by making us actually want it – so we become complicit in our own change of behaviour. Talk about 1984 (‘I love you Big Brother’).

How does this affect the Church?

Apart from my concern as a citizen about losing my freedoms, the other (more important) reason I’m interested in all this is because this is the sort of manipulation that when presenting the Glorious Gospel of the Blessed God we DON’T do. We don’t manipulate people into becoming Christians. We don’t ‘Nudge’ people into the Kingdom! Even if it works, and it does – we don’t do it. This is one reason why I’m not in favour of big organised evangelistic campaigns or what is called ‘the Invitation System.’ We should run a mile from any such methods. As the Bible says: ‘… we have renounced disgraceful, underhanded ways. We refuse to practice cunning or to tamper with God’s word, but by the open statement of the truth we would commend ourselves to everyone’s conscience in the sight of God (2 Cor 4:2).

But there’s also a dark side to all this. The church is engaged in a war. Not a physical war. But a spiritual one. ‘For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places (Eph 6:12). And as Paul tells us in another place ‘… the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds (2 Cor 10:4).’ ‘We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ… (2 Cor 10:5).’

And it’s quite interesting at his point how the Apostle Paul speaks of taking every thought captive…. I’m not sure we can so quickly dismiss some of this stuff as ‘conspiratorial’ as many Christians seem to do. How is it all affecting the church of the Lord Jesus Christ? The Bible says ‘we are not ignorant of his (Satan) designs (2 Cor 2:11). Perhaps we are ignorant of Satan’s schemes in this area? I’m all for the plain teaching of the Gospel. We shouldn’t employ any subterfuge in presenting the Gospel or any ‘bait & switch’ techniques. But that doesn’t mean, as we have read, we shouldn’t be unaware of Satans devices. Love not the world nor the things of the world (1 John 2:15). Manipulating and coercing people is a worldly activity. It’s what the systems of the world do. We don’t manipulate and coerce people into the Kingdom of God. That is the work of the Holy Spirit. It is He that makes his people willing in the day of his power (Psalm 110:3). We don’t use worldly methods. And we don’t need to either. The Spirit of God doesn’t ‘influence’ people, rather, he makes them alive (Eph 2:5)!

It’s important for us, therefore, to know there is someone that speaks the truth. The Lord Jesus many times used the phrase ‘I tell you the truth’ (verily, verily) and that is exactly what he did, and does. He didn’t use methods of coercion or manipulation. He speaks the truth, even when we don’t like it. So when he invites us to himself, as he does right now, promising rest for our souls, we can be assured that he is speaking the truth. In other words, we can trust the Lord Jesus Christ.

‘Come to me (Says Jesus), all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.(Mat 11:28 & 29).’

He speaks, and, listening to His voice,
new life the dead receive,
the mournful, broken hearts rejoice,
the humble poor believe.

(O for a thousand tongues – Charles Wesley, 1708-88)

 

Free Speech And Why It Matters by Andrew Doyle – Reviewish

Free Speech And Why It Matters by Andrew Doyle, Constable, 2021. £7.32 on Amazon at the time of writing.

It’s a hardback just a bit smaller than A5. 134 pages total. An easy to read type, a notes section and even an index. Think I would’ve preferred footnotes but it kind of works. I ended up reading the book and then read all the notes, which were actually worth reading. He uses a lot of fancy words I’ve never heard of, but then he does have a Doctorate in Renaissance Literature from Oxford. As you would expect then, the book is well researched and referenced. Like I say, the Notes really are worth reading. For example:

‘In an address to the House of Commons in March 1763, William Pitt the Elder (1708-78) recognised that the home is a sanctuary for every citizen in which in which even treasonous sentiments might be safely expressed: ‘The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It mat be frail, its roof may shake, the wind may blow through it, the storm may enter, but the King of England cannot enter. All his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement.’ p. 123, note for p. 89.

And if you know what’s happening to friends North of the Border you’ll know the relevance of that quote. As indeed does Andrew Doyle.

Early on in the book he takes a bleak view of Savonarola and his ‘Bonfire of the Vanities.’ This in the chapter titled ‘The Self-Censuring Artist.’ What Andrew doesn’t tell you is that Savonarola was going up against, through action and speech, the psychopathic Pope Alexander and his equally psychopathic Cardinal son Cesar Borgia (Duke Valentino, AKA The Prince). By speaking out against the Pope, Savonarola wasn’t long for this world. Maybe Andrew should really have been supporting him. I guess we’ll never know.

The book has 18 chapters so they are all quite short. I thought this worked well.  It’s easy to pick up and put down. I didn’t think there were any wasted words. The chapter ‘A Thought Experiment’ was interesting. Andrew chose Christian opposition to homosexuality for his experiment. It felt quite personal so I checked to see if Andrew is a homosexual – which he is. I must admit knowing that did slightly change how I read the book. Not enough to put me off it though. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I would see him as quite opposed to the Christian faith, but he wouldn’t want to lock me up for expressing the view that homosexuality is a sin. For the record I would’t want to lock him up either. I wish him no ill – at all. In the realm of Free Speech, he, along with Douglas Murray and Peter Tatchell are allies. Friends even.

As for the book, yes, it’s helpful. He perhaps makes for a surprising ally.

Like so many, Andrew wants to have an objective truth, because that is the only rational option, but then wants to have a relative view of it where it suits. You can’t have both. Nevertheless I’m grateful that common grace forces him, and those like him, to operate within a Christian Worldview, even for those that oppose it. It’s truly amazing how even the godless can end up praising God. It’s quite amusing really.

Do I recommend it? Yes I do. In fact, the way it’s written and its size makes it a handy reference book. So I may well read it again. Like me, you probably won’t agree with everything he writes. We don’t have to support his worldview, but we can support him.

As Christians we should support Free Speech, even if that means unpleasant speech, or speech that is directed at us. And there is plenty of that! There is one who judges our speech, and our prayer is that our speaking the Gospel freely will bring those who at the moment are opposed to The Lord Jesus, into His Kingdom, and then to speak FOR Him. But we don’t do that by banning the free speech of others, even those that are vehemently opposed to the Christian faith.

The other side of the Transgender Debate – Dan Crenshaw interviews Scott Newgent

Dan Crenshaw interviews Scott Newgent (No idea if that’s his real surname.) ‘Let’s talk about Transgenderism.’

This is another really important interview. So important it probably means no one will listen to it. There you go. But it’s the side of the Trans debate that isn’t being heard. It needs to be heard. The link to the interview is HERE and at the end of this post.

It’s an interview with Scott, a Transgender man. A really poignant part of the interview was when Dan asks Scott ‘Would you do it again? If you didn’t have these medical kinds of complications? Would you do it again?

Scott: Erm, (long pause) probably not, no.

Dan: Still no? Even if it was a smooth surgery?

Scott: ‘Probably not, no. You know, it’s taken me a while to say that. And you get pushed when you’re talking about this stuff to De-trans right. It’s another fallacy, I’m changed, the hormones are permanent. I could De trans but then I’d be a trans woman. And I really don’t want to go through the BS. My family has been through enough. I’ve got to the point in my life where I accept who I am. Should I have accepted who I was before? Absolutely.’

Scott needs to be heard. He tackles some really important stuff here, commenting on suicide, surgeons, and, interestingly, on evangelicals. I was tempted to use the phrase ‘Follow the money‘ for the interview. If you listen you’ll see why.

It’s quite raw in places and very honest.

Dan Crenshaw interviews Scott Newgent – Let’s talk about Transgenderism

‘The Madness of Crowds’ by Douglas Murray – Recommended reading

The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race and Identity, Douglas Murray, Bloomsbury, 2020. This is the updated & expanded edition.

Have you ever seen the 1963 film ‘It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World’? It’s a totally crazy film with big stars in it all searching for buried loot under a ‘Big W.’ It’s a comedy and is hysterical. It’s very funny.

This book by Douglas Murray plunges us into a mad, mad, mad, mad world as well. There’s a lot that’s hysterical. But it isn’t funny. At all. There is a ‘Big W’ though. And an elusive prize.

I didn’t take any notes. I simply wanted to read it. I think the book will make a good companion to Carl Trueman’s latest book (started but not finished).

On the cover of the book is the line: The Sunday Times Bestseller. This is rather surprising because, I assume then, someone is buying it. I did. Presumably lots of people are buying it – not sure if they’re reading it though. Murray was initially encouraged by this. But in the afterword of this edition he’s rather more pessimistic. The frightening aspect of the book is that you can be anything you want to be by ticking the appropriate ideological box. And this is the message: we (that is, most people) are being coerced (or simply marinated) into an ideology. We are being forced further into an ideology that divides. You capitulate or else. In fact, it works the other way as well. You can be told what you are as well. So a black man can be a white man if he doesn’t get with the program. The whole idea of black, white, man, woman, boy, girl is an utter mess of confusion and cancellation. Murray has provided us with enough evidence (all cited in the end-notes) to convince anyone, that wants to step back and see, that what is going on is complete madness.

The Chapter Titles are: 1. Gay. Then an Interlude – The Marxist Foundations. 2. Women. Another Interlude – The Impact of Tech. 3. Race. Interlude – On Forgiveness. 4. Trans. Conclusion. Then an Afterword for this edition.

The chapter on Race is the longest – just. The chapter on Trans is the saddest. The whole book is fairly tragic though. At the beginning of the book he explains the difference between what he calls a Hardware or a Software issue. It recurs a few times through the book.

‘…. the contemporary world has begun to settle on a morality which roots itself in this dispute and which may be viewed as a hardware versus software question.
Hardware is something that people cannot change and so (the reasoning goes) it is something that they should not be judged on. Software, on the other hand, can be changed and may demand judgements – including moral judgements – to be made. Inevitably in such a system there will be a push to make potential software issues into hardware issues, not least in order to garner more sympathy for people who may in fact have software, rather than hardware, issues.’ p.29.

I do think there are some conditions that might be described as a ‘Hardware’ issue simply because we live, according to the Bible, in a fallen world. We should expect to find things that don’t fit. For example Murray gives some figures for people with Intersex (formerly Hermaphrodite) that might be a ‘Hardware’ issue. I’m not convinced surgery is the answer though. It’s all very sad. Help is definitely needed but it’s coming from the wrong place. Everyone has an inherent worth and dignity because we are all  made in the image of God our creator. Everyone. Just like me they need the love and grace of God not an ideology.

‘It has been estimated that in America today around one in every two thousand children is born with sexual organs that are indeterminate, and around one in every three hundred will need to be referred to a specialist.⁷’

I wasn’t sure quite how to read those figures but according to one website I looked at there’s about 1.4 million intersex people in America. That sounds like an epidemic to me. But it depends where you are on the trajectory and also on who decides where you are. Some of the people that decide, frankly, should be prosecuted for child abuse. It’s not science or health care, it’s ideology. It’s all in the book if you can stomach it. 

I’ll quote below a couple more sections from the conclusion to give you a flavour of the book.

Because the most extreme claims keep getting heard, there is a tendency for people to believe them and their worst-case scenarios. p.242

Final quote:

‘With each of the issues highlighted in this book the aim of the social justice campaigners has consistently been to take each one – gay, women, race, trans – that they can present as a rights grievance and make their case at its most inflammatory. Their desire is not to heal but to divide, not to placate but to inflame, not to dampen but to burn. In this again the last part of a Marxist substructure can be glimpsed. If you cannot rule a society – or pretend to rule it, or try to rule it and collapse everything – then you can do something else. In a society that is alive to its faults, and though imperfect remains a better option than anything else on offer, you sow doubt, division, animosity and fear. Most effectively you can try to make people doubt absolutely everything. Make them doubt whether the society they live in is good at all (and it’s working – my comment). Make them doubt that people really are treated fairly. Make them doubt whether there are any such groupings as men or women. Make them doubt almost everything. And then present yourself as having the answers: the grand, overarching, interlocking set of answers that will bring everyone to some perfect place, the details of which will follow in the post (in other words there is no answer – my comment)’ Pp. 247-248.

Given the hot-button topics I thought the book is written quite sensitively. It’s not an aggressive book, but unfortunately what Murray can’t give you, and to be fair he doesn’t try, is any hope, or an objective truth claim to base that hope on. I don’t think he’s saying there’s no such thing as truth, I’m fairly sure he would say there is, but he can’t base it on anything. If there’s no God of truth, there can’t be any truth. The Lord Jesus said ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life.’ And so as Christians our hope is in God – the God of the Bible. But we do have to reach people with the Gospel of Christ; a world that is perishing and drowning in its own particular madness. This book describes the world, or some of it anyway, that desperately needs the Gospel.

Boris points to Christ – sort of

The Prime Minister (Boris Johnson) gave his  Christmas Message (see below) on Christmas Eve after securing a last minute Brexit deal.

It was obvious that he was on a Brexit high and took the opportunity to give us a happy Brexit Christmas. I’m sure just as many will have been pleased to hear it as those that were displeased or simply horrified at the whole process. The Brexit deal is definitely not the feast.

Like Prime Ministers before him Boris was able to demonstrate that he’s actually clueless as to what the real Christmas message is about. Of course he knows some of the details which isn’t necessarily a bad thing as it shows Christianity is still, for now, embedded in our culture. One might even say Boris had totally lost the plot if he really knew it in the first place. Like many of us probably. Embedded as it may be, the real message is easily obscured where there is no real knowledge of God or the Saviour who has entered our world to save people from their sins. There are so many things that Christmas is not about and Boris’s message for many is about as close as they want to get. I mean, contact with Christ, who is Lord of all, can be life changing. Boris is a good example, perhaps, of people that want ‘something’ to do with Christmas but really don’t want to get too close. Like Herod, he didn’t want to get close at all and set about making sure he didn’t. That didn’t work out so well for Herod. Let’s face it, the PM (any PM) has to say something Christmassy even it’s mostly nonsense.

What is Christmas about then?

In a nutshell, we all have a problem. The problem we face is that we are born with a sinful rebellious nature that wants nothing to do with God. That puts us at odds with God and makes us by nature ‘children of wrath.’ This rebellion will be dealt with and put down once and for all when The Lord Jesus comes again to Judge the world – that’s all of us. You and Boris included.

But such is the love of God that he sends a Saviour. A rescuer from the Judgment of God has come.

What do I want for Boris? The same as I want for you. Salvation from sin. A Saviour, who is Christ the Lord. ‘You shall call his name Jesus’, Mary was told. Why? Because he (Jesus) will save his people from their sins.

How does Jesus do this?

The Christmas message, and in fact the whole Christian Gospel, is all about what God has done. In the first place, He is born into this world. He lives a life of perfect obedience and is offered as a sacrifice to turn aside the wrath of God. This he does on the Cross. Wonderfully He rises from the dead and ascends to the right hand of God where he waits till the day of judgment. In the meantime, right now, Jesus is building his Church. And he is right now calling people through The Gospel (good news) to ‘repent and believe.’

Boris rightly talked about ‘rebirth and renewal’ but the rebirth and renewal the Bible talks about comes through repentance and faith in the one God sent. That is the Lord Jesus Christ. The question for you then, and for all of us (Boris included) is will you repent and believe, calling upon God for forgiveness?

‘O Lord, …. In wrath remember mercy’

Hab 3:2 O LORD, I have heard the report of you, and your work, O LORD, do I fear. In the midst of the years revive it; in the midst of the years make it known; in wrath remember mercy.

‘March 21st (1832) was appointed by the government as a day of prayer and fasting on account of the cholera that was spreading through Britain. ‘On that day there were more people than ordinary, of all ranks and ages, in every place of worship through the whole country: a great fervency of prayer was manifested, and it is thought that the Lord has poured his Spirit on the churches, from the results; as many, many, are now crying out for mercy, especially among the young people of Sunday schools.’ At Denbigh, by following July, about 200 had joined different societies of Christians there, being roused, it is thought, by the visitation of the cholera.’ It is estimated that about 2,000 were added to the Calvinistic Methodists in Caernarfonshire alone as a result of the revival.’

Revivals in Wales 1762 – 1862, D. Geraint Jones. The Heath Christian Trust. (ISBN 0 907193 10 2) p. 36 & 37.

It makes you wonder what God has to do to make us look up and call upon Him. We shouldn’t expect anything other than what we see: today, the church is seen as completely worthless by the government.