Apocalypse – Reblog

4th February 2026Insights, Others' stuff, ReblogsTony

This entry is part 33 of 33 in the series About the Bible - Inerrancy, Infallibility, Inspiration and Revelation

Some years ago, I published an essay on the Book of Revelation, the last book in the Bible. At that time, I referred to the ideas of the early Church Fathers, where I said that,

“The early Church fathers, in considering whether to include the book of Revelation into the Canon, took the decision to include it only under the following strict conditions: 1) It was not to be used for any major doctrine or in any liturgy of the church; 2) It did not have the canonical authority of the other New Testament writings; and 3) It was never to be taken literally in any way, but only metaphorically, as an encouragement for Christians about to undergo major persecution and bloodshed”.

Since that time, I have read and discussed this concept with other believers, and have also discovered a source for the concept from Canadian teacher and scholar Dr. Brad Jersak, where he kindly gave me his rationale for those ideas. I reproduce the rationale in a footnote below^[1], and I have also modified the essay slightly to allow for that sourcing.

But still, the essay is worth looking at again. It is good to re-publish such good and informative essays so that my readership can see once again the useful things that God gives us. So, here is the essay once again, tidied up a little and also with a bit of new text in there too.

Enjoy!

The book of Revelation, sometimes also called ‘Apocalypse’, ‘The Revelation of John’, or even (incorrectly) ‘Revelations’ (like ‘Trivial Pursuits’, ‘Cliff Richards’, or ‘Tescos’; all pluralised words that definitely shouldn’t be 😉 ) is probably the most confusing book in the entire Bible, and it is certainly the most confusing in the New Testament.

Its weird imagery often reads more like a nightmare than anything else. And, in fact, so uncertain were the early Church as to its origins or relevance, that it was almost left out of the Canon of Scripture that we know today. Indeed, many early canons did not include the book at all.^[2]. The early Church fathers, in considering whether to include the book of Revelation into the Canon, took the decision to include it only under the following strict conditions: 1) It was not to be used for any major doctrine or in any liturgy of the church; 2) It did not have the canonical authority of the other New Testament writings; and 3) It was never to be taken literally in any way, but only metaphorically, as an encouragement for Christians about to undergo major persecution and bloodshed. Naturally, these conditions have been conveniently forgotten, or more likely never even heard of, by those in the church today who love to misuse this book to the detriment of others.

Of course, because of what I call ‘Chalke’s Law’, which states:

“There are some people who will always find the angry verses in the Bible to confirm their obsession with anger and exclusion” (Steve Chalke)

…the book, with its weird and (on the surface) violent imagery is just perfect for those certain Christians who rejoice in – and indeed savour with eager and gleeful anticipation – the idea of the horrific mutilation, deaths, slaughter, and then endless torment of those who don’t agree with them, to the tune of rivers of the blood of the ‘unrighteous’ to the depth of a horse’s stirrups^[3]. Yes, that imagery is there in Revelation, but of course it doesn’t mean what it says on the surface.

This is because we need to remember that much of Revelation is written in the ‘apocalyptic’ style (which is why in some quarters it’s referred to as the ‘Apocalypse'^[4]), and as such it is written in a sort of code, some of which has been lost to antiquity, but some of which can be inferred by its historical context, and from whom the book was written to. In fact I think this is why, in some apocalyptic writings, the author is instructed to ‘seal up what is written'^[5], because it concerns things that need to be worked out properly. A good example of this would be in Daniel 12:4; the second half of the book of Daniel is written in the apocalyptic style, as are parts of Ezekiel. For more on this subject, I would far rather defer to more learned scholars than myself, who know far more about it than I do. For example, N. T. Wright’s ‘Revelation for Everyone’ would be a reasonable starter; it is a very informative book and is written in a style that is very easy to understand.^[6]

However, the worst thing that can be done with apocalyptic literature like Revelation is to read it literally, because it was never intended to be read as such, and indeed the misuse of this book by ignorant people (ignorant in both or either senses of a) not knowing, and b) being unimaginably unintelligent) has caused untold harm to millions of people all down through history. Indeed, I would say that no book has been misinterpreted and misapplied to others’ detriment as has Revelation. And all because people haven’t a clue what they are doing with this most lethal, and yet potentially most blessing, of all the books in the Bible. The very last thing we should do with most of this book is to take it literally.

And yet, so much of modern theology, in terms of both ecclesiastical theology and common theology, is based on passages in Revelation. Without discussing these ideas specifically here, the concept of Heaven as an afterlife idea and the concept of ‘hell’ being a lake of burning sulfur, are both concepts which are strongly based on passages from Revelation. Even the ‘Pearly Gates’, where St. Peter is traditionally employed as a receptionist; even they are entirely from Revelation. Reference for the Pearly Gates? Revelation 21:21 is where that comes from. Go and take a look 😉

So, read in the light of the idea of an angry, retributive ‘nasty god’ like that found in much of the Old Testament, Revelation will of course be seen as incredibly bad news for most people, most of whom are going to be sorry they were born, according to the gleeful claims of those ‘certain Christians’ I mentioned above.

However, read in the light of Jesus, the Prince of Peace and the King of Love, the book can in fact instead be seen as excellent news for everyone. Again, I have here neither the time, the knowledge, nor indeed the inclination to expound on why this is the case; instead I would again refer you to people who really know what they are talking about. However, I would like to share with you today a brilliant piece by my friend Mo Thomas, where he presents an opposite view to the Evangelically-accepted ‘violent’ view of Revelation. No-one should read Revelation without having to hand several huge pinches of salt, and the definite guidance of the Holy Spirit to glean what it means for us today, and, more relevantly, what it means for you personally today^[7]. Formation of major doctrine from Scriptures in Revelation is a serious error, as we have already seen. Personally, I happen to think that formation of any major doctrine, or at least dogma – a doctrine which is considered to be essential and non-negotiable – is also an error, but that’s just me 😉 I’d far rather live a life in the Spirit, completely unbound by others’ doctrines, rules and strictures. I’ll listen to others’ ideas, of course, but let’s just say there’s a lot of bones I spit out while I eat the meat 😉

Anyway, less of the masticatory^[8] digressions; I will hand you over to Mo:

The term for “Revelation” is the Greek “Apocalypse”, or the “unveiling”. John’s revelation then in the scripture is primarily about the “unveiling” of the Person and Work of Jesus, not primarily the symbols, timelines, and events. But once seen through this lens…the symbols, timelines and events start coming into focus.

The subversive nature of the apocalypse can trip up many who are looking for a violent overthrow when Christ returns, much like the Messianic expectation of those in the 1st century. This type of overthrow requires a calamity-filled blood-soaked eschatology, which unwittingly fosters a perspective of escapism – with no authentic desire to engage and participate in God’s Kingdom here, now.

Here’s the thing. The book of Revelation may just be the most non-violent war scroll ever recorded in the history of apocalyptic literature. But we can’t ever see this unless we read as it would have been interpreted by those 1st century folks. It would have filled them with hope in the midst of evil Empire, Roman oppression. Victory is achieved – not by the methods of war and violence, but by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony.

What better way to motivate hope for our role in the Story than to paint an optimistic view of the Shalom and Care of God for all that He reconciled to Himself, for His Cosmos.

The subversive way of the Slain Lamb continues to make its way forward.
________________

“Jesus is not coming back to renounce the Sermon on the Mount and kill 200 million people.

If that’s your reading of Revelation, what can I say? Lord, have mercy.”

– Brian Zahnd
_________________

The brilliant, subversive narrative we find at the end of our Bibles hinges on the throne room scene in Revelation chapter 5, where John hears an announcement for the Lion of the tribe of Judah. He turns, expecting to see a ferocious beast that tears His enemies apart, limb from limb, as Israel had long hoped and expected.

Instead, John turns and sees a tiny Lamb, looking as if it had just been slain. Ahhhh… the crucified Christ! From that point on, we no longer see ANY mention of a lion. But 29 more times, we see the Lamb of God, the prevailing theme of the Story.

This is masterful apocalyptic literature.

Yes, this King is victorious, and He reigns in power. Yet, this power is most clearly and succinctly displayed on the Cross, where we see that He would rather die for His enemies than kill them.

The book of Revelation is the Apocalypse, the “unveiling”, of Jesus the Christ, who displays His Power as the Crucified and Risen and Victorious Lamb. Don’t distort the brilliant subversion by making it a literal book about “end times” and Anti-Christ figures and the necessity of bloody violence.

Make it about our Beautiful King, the Crucified One who overcomes.

Rev 5:13. And I heard every created thing in heaven and on earth and under the earth [in Hades, the place of departed spirits] and on the sea and all that is in it, crying out together, To Him Who is seated on the throne and to the Lamb be ascribed the blessing and the honor and the majesty (glory, splendor) and the power (might and dominion) forever and ever (through the eternities of the eternities)!

Come, let us worship.

Shalom

– Mo Thomas

Regarding the return of the ‘Warrior Jesus’, and regarding a couple of other Revelation points, I once put it like this:

“If Jesus is the same yesterday, today and forever, it follows that He will be the same Jesus when He returns. The angels at the Ascension said that ‘this same Jesus…’ will return (Acts 1:11); they never said He’d return as someone different. In addition, the passage (in Revelation 5:6) about the Lamb on the throne describes Him as a Lamb, not as a Lion. He will return as a Lamb, because He left as a Lamb. That whole scene is about the literary bait-and-switch of the throne of a mighty King, the King of the Universe, in fact, being the Lamb looking as if it had been slain in the centre of the throne. The power and right to rule comes from the power of God, which is the power of the Cross – as in, the submission of the Lamb to the point of death, thus showing where true power actually lies, in the self-giving nature of God and NOT the desire to lord it over others.

“Furthermore, Revelation is very much a book of metaphysical imagery and weird Apocalyptic, coded writing. To interpret it literally would be a mistake, for most of the book at any rate. I personally think that Revelation is something where John was seeing things that were very hard to describe from a human point of view, and so they need to be taken with a very large pinch of salt. Or a dose of magic mushrooms”.

As one final comment, and as a general tip for reading Revelation, I would say that if you come across a passage in that book that the Spirit does not make come alive for you^[9], then by all means feel free to set that passage aside until such time as She does make it come alive for you. Some of it you may never understand, and this is not surprising as the book was in fact not written to you anyway (Rev 1:4). But that’s all right. We don’t have to ‘get’ it all; not by a long chalk.

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	Yes, the way I wrote that (probably in an appendix to a book by Hardin?) makes it sound very deliberate and collaborative, but I’m really distilling something quite messy, so in citing that, I would recommend saying that this is Bradley Jersak’s interpretation of a series of important factors that are not proof-texted directly. Where I draw them from is from logical inference (some completely airtight) and from what we are warranted to say from what we know of various Fathers. For example, we KNOW that the Nicene Creed (the dogma of the church) was finalized in 381. And we also know that while various significant theologians (like Origen and Athanasius) include it in their personal lists of NT Scripture, others (like Gregory of Nazianzus and Cyril of Alexandria) did not. This latter point is very important because Gregory also presided at the second council where the Nicene Creed was finalized. Here’s a bit of the messiness: ‘Chrysostom never quotes from Revelation, leaving the modern world no clue to his thoughts on the book of Revelation. Gregory of Nanzianus and Cyril leave it out of their listings of the canon. Moreover, the Nestorian churches still leave Revelation out of their canon. Revelation has never held a very secure place in the Eastern Orthodox canon. The Syriac Peshitta omits it, and the Council of Laodicea did not recognize it. As late as 850, the Eastern Church listed the book as disputed. They still do not read from Revelation regularly. [It is not at the altar with the Gospel or the reader’s stand with the Epistles]. (canonicity – What historical reasons resulted in Revelation being included in most Christian canons? – Biblical Hermeneutics Stack Exchange) Thus, the church did not collectively recognize it as canonical (complicated: Canonicity and Acceptance of Revelation (in Revelation) – Anabaptistwiki) until AFTER the Creed, meaning that the dogmas of the faith were settled BEFORE the book was received as authoritative, and therefore, the Book of Revelation CANNOT have been used to establish the dogmas that came before its reception. The rest of the story are the sort of details one can read between lines or by reading the sermons and liturgies of the church. BUT my point is NOT that we reject Revelation as canonical. It is now recognized as part of our canon. My point was that the church did not use it to generate the essentials of Christian doctrine and therefore, must not be used that way today. Any doctrinal statement drawn from Revelation would be derivative of and in alignment with the Gospels or Epistles that were used to establish that doctrine in the first place. – Brad Jersak
⇧2	I think I’m right in saying that there are some of today’s denominations that still regard Revelation as not being canonical, although I could be wrong.
⇧3	Which would be about 1.0 to 1.2 metres or so
⇧4	The modern word ‘apocalypse’ and its derivatives such as ‘apocalyptic’ means things that are of world-ending, or at least world-shaking, importance or magnitude. This is because Revelation is seen by most literalistic interpreters as describing the end of the world, or at least ‘end-times’ stuff, and indeed to the general reader it really does read like that!
⇧5	Yes, that’s why there’s a sealed scroll for the header image. Much of Revelation is still sealed for many people, including myself, and the ‘Secret of the Lord‘ notwithstanding 😉
⇧6	Even then, you should always ask the Spirit to explain, interpret (for your upbuilding!) and apply anything that you read in that book, or indeed any other source – including this blog! Always remember that God speaks to everyone in different ways, and it is perfectly ok to ‘eat the meat and spit out the bones’. If something doesn’t sit right with your spirit, then feel free to set that thing aside.
⇧7	Technically, really, all Bible reading where you actually want God to speak to you through the Scriptures; all of that should be done under the tutelage of the Spirit anyway. Why risk missing out on His riches?!
⇧8	Related to chewing. Just so you know.
⇧9	Another reason for reading the Bible under hte Spirit’s guidance!

Prayer and Parking Spots

30th January 2026Insights, Others' stuffTony

I don’t need to add anything to this great little essay by my friend Heather. There’s so much meaning and so much to think about in here that I think it’s better if I just leave it alone and let you chew it over for yourself!^[1]

Over to Heather:

I’ve been thinking lately about how people criticize people who pray for a good parking spot. And I think that the criticism CAN be justified, if people are just always praying about selfish, petty things and don’t care about anyone else. And I get how it can seem to an observer to be really messed up to think that “God gave you a parking spot but God didn’t heal that kid from cancer.”

But I think more often the people who are bothered by people who share they were grateful God gave them a good parking spot are misunderstanding the inclination and heart of people who weave prayer into mundane things of life.

So let me turn this around and share my perspective on silly little prayers like praying for a parking spot.

First, it might not always be proper to pray for a parking lot close to the store, sometimes it might be more fitting to pray for a parking spot near a neighbor you need to meet or that gets you the right amount of exercise for the afternoon. But sometimes we really need one close to the store too, so YMMV.

But I think learning to pray about random little things in an ongoing way is actually a way to align yourself in obedience to the Lord. And a mode of consecration.

It’s consecration to learn to involve God in everything, and to refuse to leave Him on the sidelines until cancer shows up or until Sunday morning. It’s consecration to cultivate our mind towards recognizing God in potential randomness, and it’s obedience to recognize the scriptural injunction that believers are called to learn to live a life where conversation and communion with God is meant to encompass everything in life.

And it’s daring to learn to act like God cares about hearing you, and loves you enough to entertain your mundane life details; but it’s an expression of faith in a God who would send His very own Son for each and every one of us to act like your every day life concerns are worth His ear.

So in fact, asking for a parking spot can be a declaration of faith in the death and resurrection of the Lord.

But most of all, it’s an expression that is meant to be humbling. That when we share our personal joy that God showed up to us in something seemingly ridiculous, mundane, and even selfish, and others don’t understand, we are choosing to testify anyway. We are naming where we have seen Him glorified in moments that would otherwise pass as meaningless and forgettable. And we are willing to do that even when others try to collapse that glory back into coincidence, or render it insignificant altogether.

But as believers we are joined spiritually to the Lord. And to proceed through life without involving Him would be to deny that connection. So when we pray for a parking spot, we are ready to look foolish to ourself, to any invisible spirit listening, and to anyone else in the car, that we won’t even do something as simple as park without involving the One we love and who loves us.

Our joy when suddenly the parking spot is there is not because we can’t bear to walk a few more feet to the store, but our joy is seeing God peek His head out into the random background noise of small details.

And when the parking spot doesn’t show up? At least His name was remembered on our lips for one more moment than it would have been had we just depended on our own selves to park.

That, in and of itself, is worth it.

– Heather

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	Except maybe to add a little background: some Christians like to share the little things that they believe that God has done in their lives, like finding them a parking spot, and others feel this sort of sharing – or indeed, this sort of praying – is frivolous, trivial and unimportant. And maybe it’s because they themselves can never seem to find a parking spot … 😉

Josie

25th January 2026PersonalTony

This is Josie, our Miracle Chicken.

In October last year, Josie was free-ranging in our large garden when she was attacked and left for dead by a fox. I know it was a fox because I saw it myself and chased it off, then went to look for Josie.

I found her under the bushes in the garden in a state of shock and surrounded by a pile of feathers; she had at least three deep-penetration wounds: two bite marks in her back and a big one under her back end. We immediately treated her for shock, and arranged to get her in urgently to be seen by the brilliant Ollie at Dart Vale Vets here in Devon.

Ollie agreed to try to save her, although he gave her a less than 50% chance of survival. He cleaned her up, sewed up the wounds as best he could (on the biggest wound, there wasn’t enough skin to be able to close the wound fully) and gave her some antibiotics and pain relief.

We kept her in the house for three weeks – she’d always wanted to come in to the house and now she had to be indoors! – and gave her her treatments. Chickens don’t like to be given oral antibiotics so that was a struggle every day! But she survived.

She survived.

Now, she has a secure walk-in run and cage out in the garden; sadly we can’t take the risk of letting her out freely any more because the fox still visits; we see it regularly on our overnight security camera footage, so we know it can still get in.

And now she also has two new sisters, both rescued from industrial egg farming just like she herself was rescued four years ago.

In this picture, Josie is perched on one of the ladder perches in her cage, about to begin devouring a tray of bird seed, a treat that she and both her sisters love.

She really is a Miracle Chicken, and we are so glad that we saved her life that day. Poor little sweetheart can’t go out free-ranging any more, sure, but she’s still lovin’ life and you really can’t tell that anything ever happened to her.

Dear little Josie. We are so proud of her! ❤️

Ideas…

21st January 2026Quotations, Insights, Others' stuffTony

This entry is part 19 of 19 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism

As part of my series on the Problems of Evangelicalism, here’s a slightly different approach to the subject.

This post is comprised of an eclectic collection of ideas about common Evangelical misconceptions, and some responses to such misconceptions which show up the misconceptions^[1] in their own right. They are a bit like the Proverbs in the Bible; seemingly random and unrelated sayings and concepts which nevertheless have a common, underlying theme.

Many if not most of them are my ideas; nevertheless, maybe think of it like one of my ‘Quotes’ pieces; indeed, some of the ideas are taken from such articles.

Enjoy!

For so many, the thing that ruined Jesus for them wasn’t the lure of sin, but the lovelessness of Christians.
– Chris Kratzer

I have to jokingly say that [a preacher from a church I used to attend] would be a preacher I would invite to speak if I thought the congregation was getting too happy. He’d soon put the kibosh on that.
– Me

I hate when they talk about ‘hyper-grace’, when they want to teach about grace but don’t like the idea of it being freely given without asking anything in return. The idea of grace is too much for the religious mind; it cannot comprehend grace, because grace is free, and religion is work. There’s no such thing as hyper-grace; there’s only grace. Grace is by essence hyper. It’s like the “color” white. White is white. There’s no hyper-white, there’s just white. If you add anything to white, it becomes something else, it becomes a shade of an other color. Grace is grace; if you add anything else it’s not grace anymore.
– Yorick Videlson

Plus they are likely trying to twist [a Bible verse’s] meaning to their own ends. How many churches’ signs have we seen where they are called ‘Grace [whatever] Church’ but of course it’s a bait-and-switch for a den of legalism.
– Me

Religious people are good at using terms they don’t understand. Actually, using terms at all to describe and define the spiritual comes from a religious mind. A free spirit doesn’t have words to share the divine experience, because it’s precisely that: an experience. You can only let people see the fruits and the effects; you know, like the wind.
– Yorick Videlson

I define Religion [as opposed to faith – Ed] as being the concept of humans trying to please, appease or otherwise placate ‘the gods’ (including the God of the Bible) so that said humans will not be subject to those gods’ wrath, whatever form that wrath may take – volcanoes, famine, flood, going to Hell, or even just plain and simple ‘bad luck’. Usually, Religion involves performance of some kind: doing rituals, magic spells, sacrifices, obeying rules either written or tacitly inferred. Religious people are people who feel that this ‘doing stuff’ is necessary in order for them to be able to approach God/the gods. Personally, I think that’s just a modern form of superstition.
– Me

“If you find that your heart has grown bigger than your doctrine, know that it is the doctrine that needs to go, not the heart that needs to be restricted.”
– Jeff Turner

If God desires us to love Him in any serious way, He would be stupid to threaten us with Hell. Or any other punishment. Once punishment is introduced, any action comes from fear, not love.
– Susie

If wrath would be a property of God it would be the 10th fruit of the Spirit. It is not.
– Anon

The Bible worshippers think God stopped speaking after the last word in the book of Revelation. Then they limit God to just be a sign poster pointing you back at the Bible.
– Kehinde

“Christianity is like a swimming-pool. All the noise comes from the shallow end.”
– Quote from a US theologian.

[Speaking of a photo of a legalism preacher who doesn’t look all that happy] No wonder he’s looking so fed up. He’s missed that the Kingdom of God is not about following rules, but about righteousness, peace and joy. One is a set of behaviours. The other is a state of being. I know where I’d rather live
– Me

The thief comes to steal, kill and destroy. It’s the religious mindset destroying and tainting everything it touches, and thus steals joy. People who are in that mindset have my pity, but not my sympathy. The gates of hell are locked from the inside, said CS Lewis, and they are in there by their own choice. The hell of religion, that is. All it takes is the decision to call BS on the whole thing, and they can escape.
– Me

Can we get it wrong if we follow the Spirit? Of course. And you don’t have to look very hard to see a few thousand years of people getting it wrong by following the Book, either.
– Keith Giles

Unfortunately, sometimes the grey religious NPC types twist the ‘unmerited’ idea [that is, the idea of Grace being the unmerited favour of God] into ‘unworthy’ and ‘undeserved’. This is wrong. All it means is that Grace is unearned – you don’t have to *do* anything in order to obtain it or to keep it. You haven’t received it through any merit, but just as a gift. But they like to mask that by saying that it is something we are actually not worthy of receiving. More Pharisees shutting the door of heaven in others’ faces.
– Me

You will not heal by going back to what broke you.
– Anon

The reason that Evangelical attack dogs attack mystical experiences is that they themselves lack such experience. [The people who do that kind of attacking of others] have likely never knowingly known the Presence of God. In the same way as miserable people love to drag others down to their level, so too these Evangelical attack dogs try to deny all valid mystical experiences, so that they think they’ll feel better about their own lack of such experiences. But a) it doesn’t make them feel any better; and b) nothing they can say or do can ever erase the reality experienced by those they attack. The caveat is that not all Evangelicals are like that, fortunately.
– Me

…non-Christians are asking the L.G.B.T.Q. question before they even enter the door as a litmus test as to whether they will even come in the first place. We can argue about whether that’s fair or not, but we can’t argue about whether that’s reality. They simply will only come to a church that is welcoming of L.G.B.T.Q. people, and not what they call “pretend” welcoming into what they call “second-class citizenship.”
– Bill White

What [Evangelicals] do is yes, they claim the Bible leads them to Jesus, just as Jesus says (John 5:39), but their job is to lead them back from Jesus to the Bible, it seems!
– Me

A god who saves you from himself is a god in whose presence you will never truly feel safe. – Jeff Turner

I didn’t want to bring people to my old church precisely because I didn’t want them to hear about the loving God I personally know, in such terrible terms [as one who would send people to burn forever in hell]. I see that now. I wasn’t sure back then why I was so reluctant, but this is why.
– Me

I’ve also noticed that when you start to enthuse about your freedom while talking with a Legalist – whether they know they are one or not! – the first thing they will do is to try to explain to you why you should not be free. It’s usually couched in Bible verses, and [possibly] from a good heart, but still that’s what they are doing. “He gave His word for freedom; you use it to enslave“. And they will claim that they are under Grace but their lives will not show this. I sometimes wonder if this is simple insecurity; they feel threatened to see someone operating out of freedom instead of Law.
– Me

I think [legalists] need the ‘security’ afforded by having clear rules by which to live… Even if they consistently fail to live by them (and consequently live stunted lives of fear and self-loathing). It’s pretty sad really, especially when all the ‘evidence’ needed to live a life of freedom is readily available.
– Phil Hendry

[It’s] so sad; [legalists] are still clinging to the side of their swimming pool, shouting unheeded and unnecessary warnings to those who are out in the deep waters of faith and living life to the full.
– Me

When some people talk about the gospel, you’d think that John 3:16 said: “God so hated the world that he killed his only Son.” Sometimes people say: “That picture is important—wrath and sin and hell and all the rest of it, and it’s because God loves us.” But simply adding the word “love” onto the end of that story can actually be even worse. It is like what abusers do when they say, “I love you so much”—it’s hideous.
– N.T. (‘Tom’) Wright

To Pharisees^[2] condemning the ministry of inclusion^[3]: “You are just the jealous older brother (from the Prodigal story). You have worked hard to earn the Father’s favour, only to be told that you had His favour all along. And now you want to deny it to the Prodigals out there. Well, shame on you”.
– Me

For me, I know how much the unclean have besmirched the name of my faith. But I refuse to let them steal my birthright: I am a Christian; I was a Christian before they stole the name and I will still claim that title for the rest of my life. I am a Prince of the Kingdom of Heaven; a child of God and He is my Father. I was crucified with Christ and have been raised up with Him to heavenly places. These things have been revealed to me over and above what a mere book says, and I know them as part of my make-up, as you say. It’s part of who I am, too, and, like you, no-one can take that away. Even (and especially) the Thief and his children.
– Me

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	If I was playing a game of Radio 4’s ‘Just A Minute’, I’d already have been buzzed for repeated use of a word. Sorry about that. But it was supposed to be used to emphasise a point….
⇧2	That is, self-righteous people in today’s Christianity, not the ancient sect of first-century Judaism – although they are of the same spirit!
⇧3	That is, the inclusion of everyone into Jesus, not just those who agree with certain doctrines, are of a certain sexuality, or have said the ‘right’ prayer

Casting Down the Imaginations – Reblog

14th January 2026Insights, ReblogsTony

This entry is part 18 of 19 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism

Some years ago now, I published an essay describing how I felt that God is being misrepresented by the Church because of various doctrines that make Him seem somehow ‘less attractive’ to people outside the Church^[1]. Doctrines that give people a really good set of reasons why they would never ‘darken the doors’ of a church building – and I really don’t blame them.

Not much has changed since that essay was written. Church attitudes change at a less-than-glacial pace; I think it’s true that, in religious circles, ideas, attitudes and doctrines remain more set-in-stone more than in any other part of society. That said, when I say that not much has changed, it’s probably more accurate to say that this is really true only in the most hardened churches, where the inmates are partly deaf to the Voice of the Spirit. Encouragingly, in some places, people are coming to realise more and more that past attidues should be left behind and more ‘modified’ attitudes adopted in the light of things that God has said to them. I suppose that this is what church growth actually looks like in practice; as the individuals in a given congregation have their attitudes slowly and gently modified by the Spirit, so then the congregation as a whole gradually reflects those attitudes in increasing measure. And if I can change, despite having once been one of those apparently hardened people, then I guess anyone can^[2]. It’s also quite instructive to me in that, in the past, I have usually majored on what individual spiritual growth looks like, and not really said much about what it looks like at a congregational level. I’m still learning!

At any rate, the essay is still applicable today, and even more so in that I now have a series going – my series ‘The Problems of Evangelicalism ‘ – for which it is particularly relevant. And so here’s the essay, unchanged from its first publication, except for my usual tidying-up of asterisked footnotes into properly-indexed ones.

Here is the essay:

“Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” 2Cor10:5 (KJV)

I’ve recently identified the driving force behind my contentious blog posts, my forum postings (usually contesting posts by religious hard-liners) and my attitudes in general towards things spiritual.

It’s simply this: I feel passionately that the God that I love has been grossly misrepresented by certain current Church doctrines and attitudes. It is apparent to me that the Gospel of a God Who loves everyone, and saves people entirely by Grace, has been watered-down by several seriously-flawed, man-made ideas.

Jesus said, “But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men” (Mat 15:9 (KJV)) – in other words, things from men’s imaginations being taught as if they are truths worth stating as part of your belief structure (which is basically what a doctrine is).

Now, St. Paul wrote of ‘the weapons of our warfare’ being mighty in God for the destruction of [spiritual] strongholds (2Cor10:4). And the current spiritual strongholds that are in place are that God is seen as a horrible, evil, vicious, judgemental dictator; partly because of how certain people portray Him, and partly because of doctrines that have been held as true – in my opinion, erroneously – by the Church.

And it’s time to tear down these strongholds – these ‘imaginations’ – and that’s why I post as I do. These horrible man-made ideas, that malign the name of God and besmirch His Character, are indeed the ‘imaginations’ that need to be torn down, and the reason they need that is because, as the verse above says, they exalt themselves against the knowledge of God.

Let’s look at the verse again:

“Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” 2Cor10:5 (KJV)

‘Exalting’ means ‘lifting up’, so what we are saying here is that these ‘imaginations’ – doctrines made up by men – are lifted up against the knowledge of God; they give Him a bad name, if you like, and skew humanity’s perception of Him. They portray Him in ways that are simply untrue.

And so I am completely fed up with my wonderful God being portrayed as horrible, by these ‘imaginations’, and by people who really should know better.

Let me be more specific, and use a few examples.

The Doctrine of Hell

Of course, the first up is the doctrine of Hell, as espoused by most people in the current Evangelical branch of the Church. This doctrine states that if a person does not believe in Jesus in this life, then when they die they go to Hell where they will be tortured forever.

This awful doctrine speaks of a cold, heartless god who, quite arbitrarily, sends people who have never heard the gospel, to this Hell place.

To quote from Rob Bell,

“Millions have been taught that if they don’t believe, if they don’t accept in the right way, that is, the way the person telling them the Gospel does, and they were hit by a car and died later that same day, God would have no choice but to punish them forever in conscious torment in hell. God would, in essence, become a fundamentally different being to them in that moment of death, a different being to them forever. A loving heavenly Father who will go to extraordinary lengths to have a relationship with them would, in the blink of an eye, become a cruel, mean, vicious tormenter who would ensure that they had no escape from an endless future of agony. Does God become somebody totally different the moment you die?

“That kind of God is simply devastating. Psychologically crushing. We can’t bear it. No one can. And that is the secret deep in the heart of many people, especially Christians: they don’t love God. They can’t, because the God they’ve been presented with and taught about can’t be loved. That God is terrifying and traumatizing and unbearable.

“And so there are conferences about how churches can be more “relevant” and “missional” and “welcoming,” and there are vast resources, many, many books and films, for those who want to “reach out” and “connect” and “build relationships” with people who aren’t part of the church. And that can be helpful. But at the heart of it, we have to ask: Just what kind of God is behind all this?

“Because if something is wrong with your God, if your God is loving one second and cruel the next, if your God will punish people for all of eternity for sins committed in a few short years, no amount of clever marketing or compelling language or good music or great coffee will be able to disguise that one, true, glaring, untenable, unacceptable, awful reality.”

– Rob Bell, Love Wins: A Book About Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived

Everything that exists was created by God. If Hell exists, then it too must have been created by Him. But I find it hard, nay, impossible, to believe that God has indeed created Hell. It’s quite simple to tell, really: we’ve just said that by Him all things were created (Col 1:16); and without Him nothing was created that has been created (John 1:3) and, put simply, God cannot have created Hell because in Him there is no darkness. And he’d have to be a pretty dark person to have created Hell, but of course He’s not. And therefore Hell does not exist, or at least not the Hell that is portrayed in modern Christian doctrine.

(1Jn1:5)
You see, that Hell doctrine has to have increasingly complex arguments put in place to defend it, where really it (the doctrine) should not exist at all and it is simpler and far more realistic to simply discard the whole doctrine.

I too was brought up in the faith believing in the doctrine of Hell, and would you believe that I almost rejoiced in thinking that those who did not agree with me were destined to burn there. How sick was I? And yet I do think that some people believe this but without really thinking it through. They are just parroting what they have been told. There are so many other arguments I could make on this subject, but this is not the place for them. Click here for my blog’s resource page on Hell, which also includes my own personal opinions, for what they’re worth.

And, in fact, there are encouraging signs that individuals like me in the Church are ‘privately’ coming around to the point of view that God does not, and never has, condemned people to eternal suffering based on their theology. Here’s an interesting article on that subject.

‘Angry God’

The next travesty and slur on the Character of God is the Doctrine of ‘Angry God’. Now it’s not named as such in any doctrinal handbook, but it’s inferred by most Christian doctrine that god’s holiness is so pure that he can’t bear to look upon sin, and his ‘wrath’ is so great that he has to ‘punish’ people for sin. He’s a god of destruction, one that kills women and children and commands his servants to hamstring all their enemy’s donkeys. Over to Jeff Turner for a good summary of the way that God is seen by most people – and what Jesus does to banish that notion:

“The sad truth is that we have all inherited a portrait of God that looks far more like Mt. Olympus than Mt. Zion, and it’s an inheritance that most are too terrified to discard. In our Western traditions God is often presented as being cold, austere, distant and judgmental. We imagine Him surrounded by dark clouds, with a scowl sprawled across his angry mug.

“He’s very eager to be pleased, but, unfortunately, extremely difficult to please. He is a hermit that is notoriously difficult to coax out of hiding and even harder to keep around because the slightest scent of sin can send him bolting for the hills in a rage. In fact, one of our imagined deity’s greatest weaknesses is His sin allergy. Wherever there are humans behaving badly, you can be sure he’ll be absent. Where there are broken people doing broken things with their broken lives, God will not be present, for in our mythology human sin works like Kryptonite against him, forcing Him to retreat and separate Himself from us.

“He is mostly sad and mad, and rarely, perhaps when his enemies bite the dust, glad. He is heartbroken over our lack of devotion and disinterest in prayer, but is himself quite disinterested in the everyday events of our lives. He is a demented Santa Claus of sorts, who tightly clenches the naughty list – which we’ve all landed on, by the way – and dreams of filling our spiritual stockings with the burning coals of judgment. When he looks at [a nation], he doesn’t see individual people who desperately need love and mercy, but a widespread, faceless blob of darkness, deserving judgment. He’s sickened by our lack of fervency, repulsed by our spotty church attendance records, and gets all up in arms when our summer vacation extends over a Sunday morning. To put it simply, He’s angry.

“The God that a large percentage of us imagine and pay homage to is disgruntled, disappointed, and disapproving. While some may be fortunate enough to have imagined Him in His true state, my experience has been that 9 out of 10 people, myself included, do not see Him rightly. We’ve been subjected to hours of teachings that have subtly sown into our minds the idea that He is primarily a legal deity concerned with rights and wrongs, and this subconscious programming is absolutely killing us. I would even venture to say that it is the leading cause of anxiety, fear, discontentment, and depression among Christians. In all of this fear, turmoil, and mythology, however, Jesus Christ, the Word made flesh, still stands in our midst, combatting these false ideologies, and seeking to shine the light of Grace upon the face of His Daddy.”

– (From Saints in the Arms of a Happy God: Recovering the Image of God and Man, by Jeff Turner, and quoted in better context in my previous article ‘The Ultimate ‘Bad Witness’‘)

And as beautifully written by someone I know on Facebook,

“Many people live their lives in depression and anxiety from the theology through which they find their existential meaning, fearful of the future, confused about God and thus about themselves, walking around believing they are rotten to the core, and that God is disgusted with them and would wrathfully destroy them except that he sees them through the appeasing violence done to Jesus. This is a prison for the mind and heart. It is not the Abba that Jesus revealed, nor is it the revelation of the sons and daughters of God, nor is it the life abundantly Jesus came to give, nor is it the power of the kingdom of heaven that dwells within us.

“Now my goal is to help Christians deconstruct this false, baseless idea of existence, and the structures of reasoning that have imprisoned their mind, and give them permission to break free of fear and believe and trust in an extravagantly good Father, who is revealed in the Son, [Whose] love is an endless ocean that you cannot escape as long as you exist, because your existence is energized by nothing less than infinite love. There is no other reason for you to exist except for love” [emphasis mine]

Yes, be assured that Father God is good – as represented by Jesus. Anything else is a complete misconception. Want to know what Father God is like? He’s just like Jesus: “He who has seen Me has seen the Father” (John 14:9) and “The Son is the radiance of God’s glory and the exact representation of his being” – (Heb 1:3). And in Him there is no darkness – none whatsoever! Let’s read that Scripture (1Jn1:5) again:

‘God Hates Gays’

I’ve written about this many times before, but the principle of persecution of, well, not just gay/lesbian/transgender (LGBTQ) people, but other ‘minorities’ too, is just the tip of the iceberg. The Old Testament is full of lists of people who, supposedly, God will not permit in the ‘assembly’, that is, people who are not allowed to worship him. This list includes all those who are not of the tribes of Israel, and even within those tribes, there are many minorities – lepers, those who have been ’emasculated by cutting or crushing’, those with various skin conditions, women on their menstrual cycles – the list goes on. And it’s no different in today’s church – people are ostracised for all kinds of offences, the main ones of course being those that can be ‘supported’ by mistranslated and/or out-of-context Scripture verses (which basically anyone who knows their Bible can do; it’s easy to find a Scripture somewhere that will seem to support your point of view!). Oh, and those who do not toe the party line! Basically, anyone who is different, anyone who does not ‘fit in’; that person is ripe for ostracism. While this is not always a doctrine as such (although the gay persecution stuff is; there are at least six Scriptures that are misinterpreted so that gay people can be ‘scripturally’ discriminated against), it is still a major black mark against my Loving Father in the eyes of the world. What the world sees is that Christians – and therefore God – hate gays. The Church does not properly represent God on this matter! “I desire mercy, not sacrifice” – (Hosea 6:6) – God would rather people were good to each other instead of being religious! More of my musings on how the Church treats LGBTQ people can be found here, here, here, and here. But the point is that these practices are a major stumbling-block as perceived by someone considering coming to faith. And it’s a stronghold; an ‘imagination’. I understand that people are afraid of ‘differences’, but surely in the Church Family, there must be a better way than the dysfunctional practice of ostracism. Whatever happened to ‘live and let live’?

The ‘Bad Witness’

Then there’s the question of the people who profess Christianity but who come across as all harsh, judgemental^[3], vindictive and unbending. Like those I describe in my article – ‘Bad Witness’. These people see the Holy Spirit as a Convictor^[4]) (actually only one step from an Accuser) rather than a Comforter, and Jesus as yet another Lawgiver rather than Him being the end of the Law (Rom 10:4 (KJV)). These people can be found in their droves on religious forums. They portray Father as an angry Dictator, as we have already seen. So, all three Persons of the Godhead are maligned at the same time! And I therefore go on the forums to present the alternative view: that actually God likes the people He has created (including the harsh people!). Sometimes these people claim that I am not a Christian, and one forumite in particular was rather dischuffed that I didn’t support him at all, despite me claiming to be a believer and from that he concluded my salvation state was nil. But of course I’m not going to support him in his transmitting opinions that I feel to be toxic to others. How can I support someone I don’t agree with? But if he was ill, in need, hungry or in need of encouragement, I’d be right there beside him (except I think he lives in America so he’s too far away!)

In some ways, these people are living examples of what a person would have to become like if they are to mirror their heavenly father as they actually see him, if they believe that he’s like that too. If their god is harsh and judgemental, then they are going to portray him as harsh and judgemental. So in a way, they are just representing god in the best way they can; the problem is that, in the eyes of the world, they represent the real, loving, living God, and what the world see is, of course, awful! In a very real way, this ‘Bad Witness’ is actually an extension of the ‘Angry God’ doctrine above; what we are seeing here is merely the manifestation of that image of god to the world for them to see, and for them to be disillusioned with. Who would want to come to Church when they think it will be populated by people such as these? Naturally, these nasty types are just in the minority – most churches, including mine, are full of the sweetest, Christlike people – but can you really blame outsiders for tarring us all with the same brush?

So, that’s just four of these entrenched ideas and concepts – Imaginations – in the Church that are so destructive; there are more but these will do for now.

You see, if we really examine our doctrines on these ideas, they all, without exception, portray our loving Father God in a very bad, harsh and horrible light. Light that is as much darkness as it is light, in fact. I would even go as far as saying that this represents a Pagan, yin/yang, Karma-style (what goes round, comes round) god than a living, loving Creator.

Just because everyone believes in a particular doctrine, does not mean that that doctrine is correct. Acceptance of the majority opinion does not make a doctrine true; it is simply more likely that nobody has questioned it! Ironically, here’s a Rick Warren saying which states exactly that (the irony being that Rick is, as far as I know, one of the people who believes in Hell, and is probably against same-sex marriage 😉 )

I believe that a new revival is slowly and carefully making its way through the Church in this day. A revival where people are waking up to seeing just how fantastic God is, how loving, kind and inclusive. Jesus’s message was not just for the people of Israel in the First Century; it was for all men everywhere and in every time (John 17:20). In this time, we in the Church need to include everyone in the message of Good News which is that God loves us and sent Jesus to show us that, in all that He did and suffered, He will stop at nothing to show us this amazing Truth.

Please be assured: this isn’t supposed to be a rant in any way. I’m just explaining where I’m coming from in my writings. You know, God is so much ‘nicer’ than how many believers – even sincere ones – portray Him, or at least, who believe these untrue things about Him because they haven’t really thought them through in any great depth, and/or they have simply believed what they’ve been told without questioning it. Maybe they don’t realise how destructive these ideas are, but let me assure you that the world outside the Church sees the problems caused by these doctrines really clearly. And it’s also counter-intuitive; most people outside the Church, believe it or not, actually think that God is Good. It’s just some of the Christians who claim to represent Him that they have the problem with!

So, these are just some of the ‘Imaginations’ that need to be cast down. If you can see yourself in any of these descriptions, please ask Jesus what He thinks. And let Him change you, in His own good time! And, if you are someone who already knows that God isn’t like these imaginations, please feel free to let everyone know. Although, I appreciate that you probably already do!

Bless you!

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	It’s really strange for me to think, today, that when I wrote that essay just over nine years ago, my beloved wife Fiona was still alive; indeed, she had only a month left to live. And that’s a really strange feeling.
⇧2	It’s interesting in that, even though I was wide-open to the Voice of the Spirit, still my heart was hardened to change. I suppose that God had His plans all arranged for His changing of my attitudes, and so the timing of it all was done in His good time, and not mine. That’s part of what happens when Jesus is Lord of a person’s life.
⇧3	The concept of ‘speaking the truth in love’ (a ripped out of context verse from Eph 4:15) is abused regularly as an excuse for telling complete strangers where they are ‘sinning’, supposedly in the hope of correcting their behaviour ‘so that they won’t go to Hell’. This concept does not stand up to scrutiny on many levels: they are spoken to complete strangers so how can there be any love involved; who are we to tell others about their ‘sin’; it’s legalistic when really the governing factor should be Grace; it’s the Spirit Who convicts the world of sin (as we have seen above, in Jn 16:8-9); according to the accusing parties, those people are ‘going to Hell’ anyway, it’ll take much more than just being told that they’re doing something wrong to ‘save’ them!; as everyone knows, this ‘method’ of ‘evangelism’ simply does not work; and, finally, everyone else can see that it’s just people being judgemental and using the Scripture as an excuse. But it’s a repulsive practice, literally, in that it repels people from the beautiful Person of Jesus Who does not judge.
⇧4	The Spirit does convict the world of sin, but in the sense of “He will convict the world in regard to sin … because they do not believe in Me” (Jn 16:8-9). Jesus is talking here about unbelievers, not believers. Those in Christ are no longer under condemnation nor accusation of any kind! (Rom 8:1-2

The Chosen

9th January 2026Insights, Others' stuff, ReviewsTony

This entry is part 32 of 33 in the series About the Bible - Inerrancy, Infallibility, Inspiration and Revelation

Every so often – actually, no; it’s really quite rare, but let’s say occasionally – a really superb and thought-provoking TV or movie series comes along that really makes its watchers think about just Who Jesus was, and what He taught. The better programmes also examine the effect that Jesus had on those who met Him; those whom He healed, and why His enemies hated Him so much.

A great example of this was the series Messiah, which was first aired a few years ago. While not explicitly about Jesus, it was still brilliant and was highly instructive in so many ways. A multifaceted feast of fascinating stories, if you will^[1].

Well, only last week, I discovered quite by accident^[2] a superb, well I might say ‘new’ series, but actually it had its humble beginnings in 2017 and became more popular in 2020, during the Covid-19 pandemic.

It’s called The Chosen and it stars Jonathan Roumie as Jesus. And it’s absolutely brilliant.

Rather than do a 633 Squadron on you, where you have to wait until the end for the best bit^[3], I will let you know, here and now, how you can get hold of this superb content for yourself and for anyone else you think might be blessed by it.

The first and main place to look is on the main website. The link is here, and the episodes can be streamed directly from that site free of charge. There’s really little else I need to do to help you on this, except maybe to let you know that there is a phone app too (search for it on your phone’s app store under The Chosen; the correct app has an icon showing a turquoise fish and two grey fishes) in which you can stream all the episodes, there’s a physical DVD set you can buy (I got mine on eBay) and there’s also a gift shop for both the UK and the USA.

And the entire series; the episodes themselves – they are all free of charge. Yowser.

So then, to whet your appetite for this brilliant project, here is my review, such as it is.

One of the things I noticed quite early on when reading about Jesus in the Bible, and reading other stories in the Bible too, is that they are not really written like ‘proper’ stories^[4] Mainly, the texts are written as wisdom, stories, histories, personal letters and prophecy – which in terms of Hebrew prophecy, it’s written as poetry. The thing that is missing in most of not all of the Bible texts – and that makes them very different from ‘stories’ as we know them today – is that of description. There are no passages that say anything like, ‘Jesus came out of His tent and stretched with a huge smile on His face’, or ‘The group sat on the shores of Lake Galilee; the tops of distant mountains were glowing in the late evening light’. There’s very little descriptive text at all, some few exceptions being things like where someone ‘went away rejoicing’ (Acts 8:39); or the rich young ruler who ‘went away sad’ (Matt 19:22). Or even for Jesus, where you’re given a tiny glimpse into His heart when He was ‘full of joy in the Holy Spirit’ (Luke 10:21).

In some ways, that’s understandable, because most of the Biblical texts are not written to be read and ‘enjoyed’ in such a way as the reader is actually placed mentally into the situations depicted, as they are in modern novels. How many times have you read a really good book and, when you ‘come up’ from being ‘in’ the book, you might have experienced a momentary disorientation as you come back in the ‘real world’? Well there’s none of that in the Bible. It’s not a compendium that is intended for ‘escapism'^[5] Even Jesus Himself is not properly-described; not really, anyway^[6]. Although He was described as wearing brilliantly-shining garments during the Transfiguration (Matt 17:1-8, Mark 9:2-13, Luke 9:28-36), even then, this was only in the company of His best friends, and only on the one recorded occasion at any rate – and you can guarantee that He ‘masked’ the glowing stuff before they came down off the mountain! Certainly, if Jesus really had routinely worn brilliantly white shining garments as a matter of course, He definitely wouldn’t have gone around those sporting high-vis threads in public. Nor would He have got away with having a ‘sharp, double-edged sword coming out of His mouth’ (Rev 1:16); the Romans would have arrested Him immediately for sure 🤣. So, we don’t even know what Jesus actually looked like; not from the Bible, anyway. But the real lack of it is that, although Christianity says that Jesus was both God and Human, in some ways the human side of His character is not really all that well-portrayed in the Bible. It never says that He laughs, apart from (you would imagine, anyway) that bit where He was ‘full of joy in the Holy Spirit’. He never hugs anyone; He eats and drinks but the ‘partying’ side of His character, which was so frowned-upon by the Religious elite of His day, can only be inferred from their reaction to it, for example in Luke 7:13, where Jesus’s reply to them is, “The Son of Man has come eating and drinking; and you say, “Behold, a gluttonous man, and a drunkard, a friend of tax-gatherers and sinners!” He wouldn’t have had to say that to them unless they were complaining about His behaviour, either openly or secretly in their hearts^[7].

For this reason, depictions in audio and visual media, such as plays, movies, screenplays, podcasts and radio programs are really useful because they can bring the stories to life like mere reading – of a categorically non-descriptive text like the Bible – can never do. These media are of course a feature of modern society; they didn’t have things like that in the past, at least not before the invention of moving pictures and then cinema.

And so, when a really good Jesus series comes out, it’s time to – once again – see how different scriptwriters and such interpret His life, His teachings and His actions.

The Chosen is such a series. I do not make this comparison lightly – for this next thing changed my life – but a quarter of a century ago, the New Zealand filmmaker Peter Jackson created the stunning, authentic and beyond-epic movie rendition of J. R. R. Tolkien’s ‘The Lord of the Rings‘. Never before, in my experience, had anyone created such a masterpiece in terms of bringing to life a book that I love so much. Granted, for a Tolkien nerd like me, I was just a little bit nonplussed by some of the plot differences, but the visualisations of the places, characters and story that I knew and loved so well were depicted so much better than I ever imagined anyone could ever do, and yet they were exactly as I imagined them – over the fifty years since I first read the books. Words can’t describe.

In the same way, The Chosen depicts the places, the characters, the miracles, the background – in short, everything in the Gospels – in just the way I’d imagined it all, and then some. There are at present five or six seasons^[8], each consisting of eight episodes. In The Chosen, Jesus indeed parties with people; He joins in celebrations like at the wedding in Cana (John 2:1-11); He doesn’t just sit in a corner looking miserable and disapproving, like the Religious would like to think He would have done. No, He’d have joined in. He’d have laughed, danced, drunk wine, hugged people, and even smiled. And He does so – a lot! – in The Chosen. This series is absolutely brilliant. I was going to say that I can’t describe it, but I feel I owe it to you, my dear reader, to attempt to do so!

One of the most striking things is the age of Jesus’s disciples. Jesus looks to be in His early-to-mid 30s or so, and, similarly, His disciples look to be in their late twenties or early thirties. If you do a Google Images search on Jesus’s disciples, you’ll get loads of pictures of hoary old men with long grey beards and turbans. But they wouldn’t have been like that at all. They’d have been young lads, and they are depicted as such in The Chosen. The series also ‘reads between the lines’ a little, in that there’s lots of dialogue between the characters that reflects the wonder of what they are witnessing. Like where Simon Peter says to Mary of Magdala, “Can you believe we are here to see this?”. The freshness and wonder of what Jesus was doing is really brilliantly expressed.

The characters are not fair-skinned, blue-eyed people, as portrayed in much Western artwork and movies depicting Bible stories. Think of the blue-eyed and very white British actor Robert Powell, who played Jesus in the 1978 movie, Jesus of Nazareth, and you’ll understand what I mean:

No, the Israeli characters are played by darker-skinned actors, and they also speak with a rather ersatz^[9] ‘Middle Eastern’ accent. Except for the Roman characters, who speak with either an English or mildly American accent. Also really well done is the cosmopolitan nature of first-century Israel. Being at the ‘crossroads’ of many trade routes and central to the land-bridge between Africa, Europe and Asia, ancient Israel was a hotbed of differing cultures, peoples and races. This is why the story of the people who witnessed the coming of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost tells this:

“Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem God-fearing Jews from every nation under heaven. And when this sound [The disciples speaking ‘in tongues’] rang out, a crowd came together in bewilderment, because each one heard them speaking his own language. Astounded and amazed, they asked, ‘Are not all these who are speaking Galileans? How is it then that each of us hears them in his own native language? Parthians, Medes, and Elamites; residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya near Cyrene; visitors from Rome, both Jews and converts to Judaism; Cretans and Arabs—we hear them declaring the wonders of God in our own tongues!’ Astounded and perplexed, they asked one another, ‘What does this mean?’ “

(Acts 2:5-12)

And The Chosen reflects this eclectic mix of peoples really very well; the story-immersion resulting from the authenticity really is remarkable.

There’s lots of really great characterisations, such as the earnest and honest seeking of Nicodemus (brilliantly played by veteran actor Erick Avari), the impulsive, fiery and indeed ‘laddish’ Simon Peter, played by the Israeli actor Shahar Isaac, and Paras Patel‘s superb rendition of the fussy, pernickety, and quite probably Autistic, Matthew the tax collector.

Many nice touches are included too. Simon’s wife^[10] ‘Eden’ is a lovely, down-to-earth and honest lady who absolutely adores him, and their on-screen chemistry is a delight to see. The excellent portrayal of decent, sincere-but-misguided yet conscientious and honest Pharisees like Shmuel, as opposed to the High Priest, Caiaphas, who seems to be in it (in the episodes I have seen so far, anyway) just for the prestige and power. Then there’s the Roman Praetor, Quintus, who is ambitious, scheming and cunning, but who has the redeeming quality of recognising Matthew’s ability to think unconventionally (which is why I think he’s supposed to be Autistic)^[11] – even if that recognition is only to be used to further his own ambitions^[12]. Compare Quintus with the gritty, practical and down-to-Earth Roman Centurion Gaius who nevertheless recognises Jesus for Who He is. He’s the guy whose servant is ‘remotely’ healed by Jesus as per Matthew 8:5-13 and Luke 7:1-10. And Elizabeth Tabish‘s Mary of Magdala is simply superb.

There are also some great theological lessons in there too, which are presented in excellent ‘backstory’ scenes – in that they are not of themselves in the Bible, but are placed in the episodes to flesh out the story. A great example is this little excerpt where the Pharisee Nicodemus is tutoring his student Shmuel on God not being a static idea:

I could go on. But it’s far better for me to simply shut up and let you go and look at this, yes, phenomenon, for yourself. There are many clips from The Chosen on YouTube. And I would say that, without exception, every single one has, in its comments section, many testimonies of how The Chosen has brought to life the Gospel stories like nothing that people have ever seen. Granted, there’s a lot of clickbait out there too. But the overwhelming message of those testimonies is that God has touched people’s lives through this series like few recent things have. Jesus has become more real to people who just want more of Him in their lives. People’s faith; people’s personal walk with Jesus, has been transformed by this series.

Of course, there’s also been naysayers who complain that it is not exactly faithful to the Scriptures. People whose hearts are hardened to the amazing thing that this content really is. These people, like the legalists in Matthew 12:22-32, miss out on what Jesus is doing because they are so convinced that they are more right than He is. They miss the things that God is doing because they have their heads so far into their own preconceptions, and what they think the Messianic prophecies will look like when they actually happen. They therefore have neither the eyes to see, nor the ears to hear. Well, it’s their loss, and I have no sympathy for them – except that their precinceptions have likely come partly from others’ influence. God will hopefully give those people too the ears to hear, someday.

But, for myself, even though I already know Jesus personally, and have experienced Him in ways that maybe others haven’t, this series has strengthened even my faith. It’s lit up the Gospels like nothing else. It’s also taught me things about my own thinking that I won’t mention here – the Secret of the Lord and all that.

But I am absolutely sure that, if you watch these series, your faith will be strengthened too.

Peace and Grace to you!

Header Picture depicts actor Jonathan Roumie as Jesus of Nazareth

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	And please accept apologies for the partial and fully unintentional alliteration!
⇧2	At least, by accident from a human perspective; I am absolutely sure that this was one of those God-appointments. I feel as if I was totally set up… 😉
⇧3	Yes, the 633 Squadron syndrome is my cynical term for making people wait until the end for the best bit. It comes from the epic 1964 movie, 633 Squadron, in which the film builds up, through a series of stories, subplots and other adventures, to the climactic battle at the end. The ‘original’ Star Wars movie – later called Star Wars Episode IV – A New Hope – was also structured like this, and was in fact inspired by 633 Squadron, as openly acknowledged by George Lucas, the creator of the Star Wars universe. Both films are excellent, of course, and I only use the term fondly! The reason the term is cynical is because I see it as a very common tactic used by sports organisers, where they have a lot of build-up before the event itself; by rock concert organisers where they have supporting acts before the main act (which is of course actually good for the supporting act) and especially at churches. This might be for a communion service, where they make you wait until the end before you get your bread and wine. Or, especially, at a baptismal service where you have to sit through all the other stuff and people talking at you before you get to the fun bit at the end. It also happens on clickbait websites where they make you click through pages and pages of preamble before letting you read the news article or whatever that you really came for – if indeed you do actually get to it at all. I very quickly escape from those sites once I realise what’s happening. In short, it’s where they make you sit and wait – rather like being in a school detention – rather than getting around to the bit that everyone has really come to see. And that’s why I have put this as a footnote, so that it gives you the option of not reading it should you so wish!
⇧4	Specifically in the context of this essay, the Gospels, which are really the parts we’re concerned with here as The Chosen is a rendition of the Gospels. The Gospels are written more as a collection of anecdotes and are written as history; Jesus said this, Jesus did that. They are presented more as factual than entertainment.
⇧5	Which probably lends more credence to its authenticity, in fact, because there’s no mechanism in there for suspension of disbelief or immersive description, which in a fiction or propaganda document would be plentiful. There’d be lots of narrative content such as adverbs and adjectives – descriptive words – to draw the reader in. But there’s none of that; not really.
⇧6	Except, notably, at the beginning of the book of Revelation (Rev 1:13-16). The description there, of course, is in an apocalyptic vision and as such the writer is trying to describe the indescribable, and all that while in the apocalyptic mode – which means that it is written in a sort of code. Much of Revelation was – and is – never intended to be taken literally, and it would be a mistake to do so.
⇧7	Knowing the terminally self-righteous mindset, though, they would doubtless have been openly criticising His ‘sinfulness’ because that’s what self-righteous people did back then, and still do nowadays too.
⇧8	I think Season 6, the final season, is currently being filmed at the time of my writing this
⇧9	Although, for some of the actors, they actually are of Middle Eastern origin, and their accents are therefore likely genuine!
⇧10	As far as we know, from church tradition, Simon Peter was the only one of Jesus’s disciples who was married. We know that he was married, or at least possibly widowed, from the Gospel story told in all three of the Synoptic Gospels, in Mt 8:14-15, Mk 1:29-31 and Lk 4:38-39. In addition, 1Cor 9:5 mentions that other Apostles were also married, but it doesn’t say which ones. The reference in 1Cor9:5 refers to ‘Cephas’; this is Simon Peter.
⇧11	[Edit]: Turns out I was right. The chartacter of Matthew, as portrayed in The Chosen, is indeed supposed to he Autistic. Here’s what The Chosen’s Director, Dallas Jenkins, writes about him: “Dallas Jenkins, the creator and director of the show that has captivated millions, decided to depict the Biblical character of Matthew as a person on the autism spectrum. “When we were first choosing Matthew to be a featured character, we noticed, ‘Okay, he is a numbers guy because he’s a tax man. He’s a facts guy because the first chapter of his book is a genealogy divided into three sections of 14 names apiece, so he’s very precise,” Jenkins explains to WW. Jenkins continues, “He chose a profession that made him an outcast. I’m very familiar with the autism community. It’s in my family. I’ve done a lot of volunteer work there, so looking at that I go, ‘Boy, these are traits of Asperger’s or someone the autism spectrum. Wouldn’t that be interesting, very human and relatable to have a character who is like that? Is it factual? I don’t know. It’s plausible, and I think one of the top things that we’ve seen people relate to most with the show is the character of Matthew.” And Matthew is played to perfection by non-Autistic actor Paras Patel; this role really showcases the guy’s acting ability and has in fact led him into becoming an advocate for the Autism community. Quotation is from this article on Woman’s World.com
⇧12	I love that quality in Quintus; how he recognises the special ability – call it a ‘superpower’ if you like – that Matthew has of being able to think like that. I too have that superpower and my boss in my last job knew about it, and invited me to participate in certain work meetings specifically because he knew I would bring a unique perspective to things because of that superpower. What a guy.

Attack of the Love Buts

4th January 2026Insights, Others' stuffTony

This entry is part 17 of 19 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism

I’ve written quite a lot on the kind of people – I call them the ‘grey people’ – who try to make the Good News into Bad News; people who deny the fantastic, complete and brilliant salvation^[1] that Jesus brought. You tell them why you are full of joy, and they promptly tell you why you shouldn’t be full of joy^[2]. We’ve all met these people! And, to me at least, these people – and their negative attitudes – are very much a part of the Problems of Evangelicalism, and thus the article is part of my eponymous series^[3].

Well, some six years ago now, the brilliant Keith Giles wrote an article closely related to that subject, and I share it here in its entirety with his kind and indeed enthusiastic permission. Although the article is six years old, it is still fully relevant and timely, as I’m sure you will agree!

Attack of the Love Buts

Try this experiment.

Step 1: Post “God is Love” on Facebook or Twitter.

Step 2: Wait 10 minutes.

Step 3: Read dozens of posts from Christians who are eager to remind you that God is love, BUT God is also a God of wrath.

This is my life. Almost every single week. I get responses from Christians – always Christians – who cannot allow a post like “God is love and all who live in love live in God, and God in them” rest on its own without adding the asterisk about God’s wrath.

Just last week I posted: “For those who say we focus on Love too much, please remember: God IS Love”.

The first comment was from a friend of mine, Leyna Nguyen, who is not a Christian. Her response was: “There are people who say this?!”

And around 5 comments below hers, the wave of wrath started to crash. 115 comments later, the post led us to statements like this one: “God loves and never stops but He also hates. Hate is not the opposite of love and God has shown He does both continuously.”

[sigh]

My friend Glenn Warner calls these people “Love Buts”, because when you remind them that God is love, they must respond by saying, “Yes, God is love, BUT…”

Why is this? Why are some Christians so insistent upon contradicting all the numerous verses in the New Testament that practically gush with the extravagant love of God?

I mean, this is just a small sample of the verses I’m thinking of when it comes to the love of God:

“For God so LOVED the world…” [John 3:16]

“The LOVE of God is higher, wider, longer and deeper than anyone can imagine”[Eph. 3:14-21]

“Nothing will ever separate us from the LOVE of God” [Rom. 8:31-39]
“The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through LOVE” [Gal. 5:6]

“LOVE is patient. LOVE is kind. LOVE keeps no record of wrongs.” [1 Cor. 13]

“God is LOVE.” [1 John 4:7-21]

Etc.

Do you know what you will never read following any of these pontifications on the amazing, unending, extravagant love of God?

You will never once read anything about the wrath of God to “balance” out this teaching.

You also never once read any statements about how you and I are unworthy of God’s love, or how we can’t earn or deserve God’s love.

Never. Not even once.

Instead, what we read is page after page, verse after verse of the fantastic, endless, transformative LOVE of God that is poured out on us night and day like a never-ending waterfall.

So, like it or not, we are loved.

What I don’t understand is why some Christians are so eager to shut down this love train. Why do they seem so afraid of a God whose character is love? Why are they threatened by a God who IS love?

Worse: Why are some Christians MORE afraid of a God of love than they are of a God of Wrath?

That’s what I legitimately do not comprehend.

Perhaps this is “Big Brother” syndrome? Like when the Prodigal Son returns home and the Father forgives him so completely and quickly and throws the party for him, it’s the older brother who can’t handle it. He hates the idea of this extravagant love being shared with his brother the “sinner” who deserves to sleep outside with the servants.

Maybe that’s the reason why some Christians today want to pencil into the margins of their Bibles a long list of wrathful God examples to balance out the overly-loving verses about a God who reconciles, forgives, embraces, restores, and loves His children no matter what they do.

What’s strange to me is that their New Testament scriptures don’t reflect their bias towards wrath, so they literally have to reach all the way back to the Old Testament – before Jesus came to us with the Gospel [and grace and truth] – to find the pictures of a God they like better. Then they cut and paste that angry God’s face over the face of Jesus so they can sleep better at night; rest assured that they are loved and those other “sinners” are going to get what’s coming to them in the end.

But, I can’t buy that. I have to take the New Testament and the “Good News” of Jesus for what it is – Good News!

We are LOVED by a God who IS Love! We were created by this God of Love – in God’s image – so this means we are LOVED! Created by Love, in the image of LOVE, to BE Loved.

This is who we are.

Love is who God is.

Love is what God does.

Loved is who we will always be.

There is no “Love But…” verse in the New Testament. There is only love. Endless, boundless, unending, unrelenting, exceptional, amazing, fantastic, glorious love that we can only experience to believe and receive.

Hopefully one day those who call themselves followers of Jesus will relax and get comfortable with the idea of a God who really is love, inside and out. No “ifs”, “ands” or “buts” allowed.

Until then, I’ll just keep posting about the God who loves us more than life itself.

Won’t you join me?

– Keith Giles, shared with his kind permission

Link to original article is here.

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	Salvation here referring to it in its broadest and most complete sense of the complete restoration of relationship with God; the wholeness, peace, healing and freedom that Jesus brought. Not the ‘being saved from Hell’ stuff, because I don’t believe in that theology, but even if Hell exists, then He’s saved us from that too.
⇧2	Jesus spoke of these people in Matthew 7:6, where He suggested that people “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces”. And that is exactly what they do. I will let you ponder the meaning and ramifications of such actions performed even by fellow believers!
⇧3	As usual, the idea of ‘the church is, at the same time, both the best, and the worst, witness for Christ’ is true more in the second case (the worst witness) than the first case. These people are a proper pain; funsuckers, emotional vampires and definitely not people you would want to have ‘encourage’ you. They feature quite heavily in the Biblical book of Job 😉

My Desert Island Discs!

30th December 2025Insights, PersonalTony

I am an avid BBC Radio 4 listener.

While I do listen to the BBC news on there, it’s always with a hefty pinch of salt… however, there are also quite a few intellectual-type programmes on Radio 4; things that engage my mind and my thinking. There’s some very good humour too, and there’s also some terrible humour, of the kind where you need to be told it’s humour or you’d never have noticed^[1]. In particular, I actually find ‘Woman’s Hour‘ to be really interesting and useful, for reasons which are probably too complex to go into here.

But there’s also some more personal-style programmes on there, and one of these is ‘Desert Island Discs‘, which I usually listen to on a Friday as I am cleaning out our rats’ cage.

The format is simple. Each episode features a ‘celebrity’ – referred to as ‘the castaway’ – who is about to be stranded on a desert island, and has to choose a list of eight musical tracks^[2] which they consider to be important to them for one reason or another. The show is centred around an informal ‘interview’ with the castaway, where they introduce each track and give the reasons why they have selected it to accompany them to the desert island. A short excerpt from each track is then played, or maybe the entire piece if it is very short^[3].

The interview with the castaway usually elicits anecdotes, attitudes and wisdom, in a highly-varied mix from castaway to castaway, which are usually fascinating to hear. In addition, at the end of the show, they are told that, in addition to the complete works of Shakespeare, and the Bible^[4], they are also allowed to choose one other book and a ‘luxury item’ that they would take with them to their desert island. And then to choose which one song from their list they would simply have to have with them on the island.

As I listened today (it’s a Friday as I write this, so it’s clean cage day once more for the ratties!), I thought to myself, “I wonder which tracks I’d choose?”, closely followed by, “This might make a good blog post!” and so here I am, about to be marooned on a desert island^[5] and having to think of eight tracks, a book, and a luxury item.

My tracks are not necessarily my favourite music. But they do have meaning for me, and that’s what I’ll share.

So, here we are. My Desert Island Discs. I will present the full version of each track, and my readers will maintain full control as they can always stop each track as they get bored!

Find somewhere comfy to sit; this is a long one!

All my life, I have been surrounded by music. My maternal Grandad, whom I never met (he died of cancer shortly before I was born), was an amateur operatic performer and musician. My Mum and Dad were part of a concert party that used to do performances in local theatres. And then my Dad was a professional musician for many years working hard doing the club circuits in the North of England. Back then, in the heyday of the Working Men’s Clubs, many well-known names in British entertainment cut their teeth on the stages of smoke-filled halls filled with ordinary, everyday working-class people who were simply leaving behind the grind of everyday life for a few hours and just having a good time. This scene was what was known as ‘Clubland’. Entertainment in Clubland was provided by snooker tables; darts; bingo; slot machines; the raffle; well-priced, top quality beer; and the ‘turn'^[6] the Artiste, aka a ‘club act’. The artiste would be a musician, a singer, a comedian, a drag queen, or maybe a magician, maybe a ‘muscleman’; a man with a bodybuilder’s physique who would pose and show off his muscles as his ‘act’. Sometimes, several acts would be on each evening, so as to provide a range of different entertainments for the club membership. There was a very wide variety of such artistes, and my Dad’s thing was to sing and play guitar and the ukulele-banjo (banjolele). His stage name was ‘Johnny Douglas’ and, in my opinion, he was one of the best turns in Clubland, retiring from performing in 1986 when he opened his bodybuilding gym in Yeadon.

This is my Dad in 1978 on one of his publicity cards:

My Dad met and worked with many such artistes, including such well-known names as Frankie Vaughan, Des O’Connor, Joe Belcher, comedian Pete ‘Machine-Gun’ Wallis^[7] (so named because of his rapid-fire delivery of his jokes; he was so fast that you only got chance to laugh at about one in every three because you’d be so busy laughing that you’d miss the next couple of gags…), Freddie Starr, Bernard Manning, Tessie O’Shea, Alan Randall, Les Dawson, and many others, all of whom started their careers on the Clubland circuit. For a flavour of the sort of thing that the working-mens’ clubs used to have going, check out this episode of ‘Wheeltappers and Shunters Social Club’, which was a long-running TV series in the 70’s which gently lampooned – ‘gently’, because it was so realistic – the sort of thing I’m talking about. Anyway, I used to go with him often and watch him perform; although I was only young (and therefore couldn’t drink alcohol in the clubs, not that I wanted to anyway!) I was still allowed in because I was part of my Dad’s ‘road crew’. I used to assist him in plugging in his gear, sound checks and setting things up. And later, while I was learning to drive, I used to drive him to and from his shows. Much of my pre-test driving practice was carried out at night!

My Dad performed numbers^[8] from two main genres: Wartime; and Country and Western (C&W). He sang songs from both the World Wars; veterans of both conflicts were still alive in those days, and his singing of nostalgic songs which used to remind them not only of their youth, but also of lost friends, and these songs were always welcome.Songs like ‘When the Poppies Bloom Again’, ‘We’ll Meet Again’ and similar. I particularly remember that October used to bring ‘El Alamein Reunions’, where soldiers from both sides of the Battle of El Alamein used to sing together, especially the song ‘Lili Marlene‘, which was the song that men on both sides of the lines used to sing at night. At these reunions, the Royal British Legion clubs, which were part of Clubland, used to host their former enemies with great enthusiasm; a marvellous thing to see.

The C&W stuff was a mix of Hank Snow, Johnny Cash, George Hamilton IV, Jim Reeves, and others. I particularly remember him doing a song with his singing partner, Kay, where they sang the classic (although not strictly C&W) ‘Something Stupid'^[9]. ‘Kay Stevens and Johnny Douglas’ was the title for their double act when they were working together^[10]. In addition, as part of his Second World War repertoire, he used to play a lot of songs by George Formby, including some really rather masterful ukulele playing. My Dad was really talented, but as far as I could tell, he didn’t want to become really famous because the Clubland scene already took him away from us as a family a lot. When he was fully professional, he used to have entire fortnights staying away from home, back for a couple of weeks, then away again staying in digs in remote parts of England. One of those places is the Webbington near Weston-Super-Mare, a place not too far from where I live now; back then it was called Webbington Country Club and he played there for a couple of fortnights a year over the course of several years. And this was before we had things like motorways, especially the M5 which actually runs past the Webbington. Anyway, back to George Formby. Formby songs were pivotal in bringing me into being a musician in my own right. I learned to play the ukulele at the age of seven, and Formby’s music ingrained, into my musical ear, a huge amount of practical and experiential knowledge of how music works, what sounds good and what doesn’t, and the structure and proper use of chords^[11]. My stage debut – at the same age – was playing the theme tune for ‘Skippy the Bush Kangaroo‘, for which my proud Dad gave me the princely reward of half a crown – two shillings and sixpence – as extra pocket-money, which for a seven-year-old was an absolute fortune! I still have that uke in my cupboard and I trot it out now and then…

Which brings me rather nicely to my first track, George Formby’s ‘Bell-Bottom George’. I am using this song here to showcase Formby’s extraordinary talent on the instrument. While neither I nor my Dad had Formby’s talent, he was an inspiration to us both, and he’s one of the main reasons why I am a musician. This is the version from the Formby movie that it featured in, the eponymous ‘Bell Bottom George’, first screened in 1943. The ukulele solo at the end of the song is one of his best:

At around the same time, I was brought up on a diet of Gerry Anderson’s science fiction (SF) TV series ‘Thunderbirds‘, ‘Captain Scarlet‘ and ‘Stingray‘, and, later on, Anderson’s ‘Space: 1999‘, along with Irwin Allen’s ‘Land of the Giants‘, ‘Lost in Space‘, ‘The Time Tunnel‘, and ‘Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea‘. There were others too, along with movies such as Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick’s ‘2001: A Space Odyssey‘ – and above all, the Apollo moon landings^[12]. And SF writers such as E. E. ‘Doc’ Smith, Clifford D. Simak and of course the inimitable Arthur C. Clarke. Also, the astronomer Patrick Moore and, again, Arthur C. Clarke, were decisive in instilling in me a love for astronomy in particular, and science in general. And not forgetting, of course, cosmologist Carl Sagan’s beautiful series ‘Cosmos’ – which came along later in my teens – and all the possibilities that it opened out for my eager and hungry mind.

The effect of these shows and authors was to give me a huge inspiration into technology, science and engineering. To have the confidence to believe in stretching the limits of the possible. To allow my mind and imagination to wander unfettered in the unknown lands of clever inventions of the future, and facts yet to be discovered. Is it any wonder that I became a professional scientist, working in both medical research and then pharmaceuticals?

As an aside, before his career as a musician, my Dad had been an engine fitter in the Royal Air Force, and was on active service in Kenya during the Mau Mau uprising in Kenya in the mid-1950’s. During his RAF career, he worked on the engines of such varied aircraft as the Avro Anson, Avro Lincoln, Vickers Varsity, Hawker Hunter, Gloster Javelin, DeHavilland Chipmunk, English Electric Canberra, Gloster Meteor and DeHavilland Vampire, and others too. He therefore taught me all I know about DIY, car mechanics, machinery, problem solving in those fields – all of this knowledge and experience culminating in me being able to help my friend Nigel build his Van’s RV-9A aeroplane in a hangar at Exeter International Airport, which is the aeroplane that we now fly and maintain as part of a small team of skilled engineers (there’s four of us). This gives us some of the cheapest flying it is possible to participate in, as we do all the servicing and maintenance ourselves.

And, of course, it was only right and proper that my passion for all things aviation should stem from my Dad’s similar passion, including his RAF service. But I describe that passion enough in the rest of my blog, without having to expand upon it here!

Anyway, I digress again! These experiences during my formative years, of being exposed to the possibilities afforded by engineering, technology, and science, gave me my scientific and problem-solving mindset right from the get-go. In addition to being a man of faith, I am also a dyed-in-the-wool scientist. I am a competent engineer and mechanic, and a problem-solver. There are very few problems I can’t solve with the judicious application of my huge skill-set^[13]. And it’s all down to the training from my Dad and the inspiration of those early SF TV series^[14] and the aforementioned science authors.

But in addition to all of that, it is certain that no SF series was more influential in my life than Star Trek.

Following closely, in my timeline, after Lost in Space, Star Trek took me, and millions of others, to places that we could only dream of. And showcasing technologies that, yes, we could only imagine back then, but which have become real and even, in some cases, already obsolete^[15] in my lifetime. Now, granted, we don’t yet have the Transporter Beam (Beam me up, Scotty!) nor the Warp Drive, to give us the ability to travel faster than light. But so many things that Star Trek first thought of are now commonplace in our everyday lives. Things like the ‘communicators’, which are what we now call a ‘smartphone’. Things like the ‘medical beds’, which we now call CT and MRI scanners. Even the fast-opening automatic doors from Star Trek now exist in everyday society. Star Trek was truly visionary in its scope; indeed only in the last decade has humanity discovered the awe-inspiring truth that most of the stars in the Galaxy have planets around them, something which Star Trek took for granted. My lifelong career in science is due to these powerful formative influences in my life; I love these things and they are part of me, part of my character. Star Trek and the Apollo space program especially instilled in me a near-fanatical interest in space exploration, space science, and astronomy. I am a member of The Planetary Society, and also my local astronomical society, because of this interest.

And so, that all brings me to my second track. Here are the opening credits from the original series of Star Trek. A beautiful melody with beautiful chords, and would you believe that there are even lyrics for it. Google it if you don’t believe me (“Beyond the rim of the star-light”)!

Earlier, I mentioned the author E. E. ‘Doc’ Smith. ‘Doc’ Smith wrote within a genre of SF called ‘Space Opera‘; this is essentially the classic, action-packed and rambunctious space adventure fiction involving loads of space battles and aliens, empires and villains. Star Trek, while indeed having ‘bad guys’ and things, and the occasional space battle, wasn’t really space opera as such; although it is listed as such in the link above, I’ve never really considered it to be so, it being more of a thinking-person’s adventure series telling stories which may, or may not, be linked as part of a wider, overreaching story arc. But ‘Doc’ Smith wrote excellent space opera, especially the ‘Lensman’ series, which tells the story of a vast, eons-spanning struggle of good versus evil. There’s everything in that series that a space opera fan could ever want: Galaxy-wide travel and civilizations; battles; super-powers; huge ships bristling with weapons; good heroes and evil villains – indeed, superheroes and supervillains! – evolving propulsion and weapons technology; faster-than-light travel and all sorts of other stuff. Smith also wrote the ‘Skylark‘ and the ‘Family D’Alembert‘ series; again, epic space opera novels that capture the imagination like nothing else.

And all that was simply excellent reading for a young man with a feverish imagination and no real cap on his concept of the limits of the possible.

But then came Star Wars. Here at last was the visual representation of the space opera. Sure, there’d been things like the comic strip ‘Flash Gordon’, from the 1930s, ‘Buck Rogers‘, and other similar stuff.

Star Wars, though, was different. Although it was at first just the one movie, first screened in 1977, there were also spin-off books, magazines and even some toys. I remember I bought my first lightsaber in about 1978! But in Star Wars, space opera was brought to life like nothing had ever done it before. And it has stood the test of time, too; like Star Trek, Star Wars has a worldwide cult following and, also like with Trek, words, phrases and concepts from the franchise have passed into common parlance. I would imagine that when I referred to a ‘lightsaber’ earlier in this paragraph, all of my readers would have known what I was talking about! Sometimes, in common ‘personality quizzes’, where you are asked things like ‘what’s your favourite colour?’ and similar, one of the questions is Star Trek or Star Wars?, like it’s one or the other that you have to like. Similar to Indian vs. Chinese food. But in both cases, these are false dichotomies; there is a third option. Both Star Wars and Star Trek. Both Indian and Chinese. And, indeed, both science and faith. There is no need for any of these to be in conflict, as each part of a pair covers areas that the other doesn’t. And so it is for these things. So, Star Wars and Star Trek have both been massive influences on me both in terms of the possibilities of technological progress, and the related suspension of disbelief that is so important in faith matters as well as in imagining the limits of the possible. Both are inspirational in their own way.

I need to mention, as a (still relevant) aside here, that I have a special love for classical music. Being both a musician and an Autistic person, I find that I try to over-analyse music that isn’t classical. My mind tries to work it out, to figure out what that chord is, how to play it, what piano fingering to use, and that sort of thing. But because classical music is so a) outside my playing style, and b) beyond my abilities, I have the ability to just let classical music ‘be’, without having to dissect it in my mind. And this is a real relief; it’s really relaxing. Because of this love for classical music, I wanted to bring to my desert island a track that is classical in style. I thought of tracks like ‘Jupiter’, ‘Mars’ or ‘Uranus’, from Holst’s The Planets suite. Or maybe Elgar’s Pomp and Circumstance March Number 1, which always used to make my Mum cry. Or some Mozart, Grieg, Bach or Boelmann. All these are worthy, but I had to pick something. And so, I chose this piece, Imperial March, by the incomparable John Williams, because, like all the best movie scores, it is classical (in that it’s orchestral), and it represents the Space Opera which, together with the more cerebral Star Trek stuff, completes my love for science fiction and its consequent effects on my scientific mindset. A mindset which has carried me through a long career as a professional scientist and on into my retirement, in which I am still given opportunities to use my mind in a similar way. I really can’t complain!

Here we are, then. John Williams’s Imperial March, from Star Wars Episode V, The Empire Strikes Back:

Although I grew up, as I said, surrounded by music, I didn’t listen to music on the radio very often. I think it was because I had no control over the music that was played; I didn’t like a lot of the music in the ‘hit parade'^[16] at the time. However, I did have some songs that I liked, and, if I liked a song enough, I would just go out and buy the single. A single, of course, being a 7″ vinyl disc which you played on your record player (a ‘turntable’ as they are known nowadays). I’d only be able to afford about one a month as there were other things I wanted to spend my pocket money on; things like Airfix model kits and paints in order to build up my huge collection of plastic model aircraft. But I did manage to buy the odd record every so often. Bands like ABBA were especially important to me back then, and I did indeed buy their albums… I used to go down into Bradford where I knew I could get the albums I wanted, at WH Smith in the city centre.

And I had other musical tastes too. On one occasion, when my Dad worked in Clubland, he was in ‘digs’ (temporary lodgings) in Spennymoor in northern England. My mother, my brother and I went up to visit him in his digs and, while there, we got playing table tennis with some guys from another band that were staying in the same digs. I learned many years later that the band were in fact the Electric Light Orchestra (ELO), a band that had many hits in the British charts during the 70s and 80s, but who never had a Number One hit despite all that. This encounter was before they became famous! Anyway, entirely independent of those table tennis games!, I grew to really appreciate ELO’s music. Because they were semi-classical, I could just enjoy their music without analysing it. Their music was often played on jukeboxes in the indoor skateboard parks I skated at in 1978, during the ‘skateboard craze’ that was on at the time. And when I worked in my cousin’s car mechanic workshop in 1979, their music was on the radio a lot then, too. And so, my late teens were lived to a backdrop of ELO music, amongst other excellent music including ABBA and, of course, a lot of C&W music too – especially that of George Hamilton IV. On my parents’ record player, I used to flog^[17] ELO, ABBA and George Hamilton IV numbers all day long. Of course, this meant that I was steeped in really good quality music. What with my Dad and his wartime and C&W stuff, and the bands mentioned above, how could I not then develop – on top of my already-existing gifting – a really good ear for what constitutes good music. And I must say that ABBA’s Benny Andersson was a huge influence on my piano style too, although it would take a very discerning ear to detect that as I actually don’t play anything like him.

So for my third track, then, I have chosen ELO’s Mr. Blue Sky, one of their most well-known, popular and indeed catchy creations. This song epitomises the musical backdrop, as I’ve said, to my teens, and reminds me of my youth spent trying to seriously injure myself doing crazy things on my skateboard – which I still have!

On the 12th of July, 1980 – the day I left school, in actual fact – my life was changed irrevocably by my encounter with my best Friend, Jesus. I cannot even begin to describe what my life became after I met Him, save to say that everything – everything – I am today is because of that encounter. When asked by those two rogue evangelists on my doorstep back in May what difference Jesus had made in my life^[18], all I could do was laugh deeply from the wellspring of joy – ‘Jesus joy’! – in my heart. Words are simply not enough to describe it. I suppose that by reading some of my blog posts from over the nearly eleven years this blog has been in existence, you might be able to see some of what He’s done, but to try to express it in words, and especially in only a few words – is simply impossible. The Apostle John wrote in John 21:25 that “Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written”. And that really is how it feels, to try to describe what He’s done with me, in me and, yes, through me over the decades. Next July, it will be 46 years since I met Him. Words cannot express enough….

And, neither can music. Yes, I was a worship leader and I led people into God’s tangible Presence on a regular basis. But even in that arena, the individual believer has to have their own, unique and individual, encounter with Him. I can’t do that for them; all I can do is to help to set them up so that they can do it more easily, if they choose. And it doesn’t need me to do it for them anyway; somehow, though, God seems to like corporate worship: “How good and pleasant it is when God’s people live together in unity! … For there the Lord bestows his blessing, even life forevermore.” (Psalm 133:1, 3b) and so, it ‘works’. But still, my life has been shot through – like the letters in a stick of seaside rock – with the Songs of Heaven. They run through me like lifeblood. And while I know, and can play, literally hundreds of these songs, for me I have two favourites: When I look into Your Holiness and Great is the Lord. The stories of what those songs mean to me is related in this article, but of all the songs I know, When I look into Your Holiness is my absolute favourite. More than any other, that song sums up and epitomises the heart of worship for me. And so, unsurprisingly, I’ve chosen it as my fifth track:

One of the things that Jesus set up for me was for me to meet my precious wife, Fiona. Fiona was the perfect wife for me. I can’t even begin to describe why that was the case, save to say that we were soul-mates. Losing her to cancer just over nine years ago was the worst thing that has ever happened to me; much of this blog since then has been about her influence on me and how I have survived her loss.

Our life together had its ups and downs, yes, but over all that time we had eyes only for each other. We were absolutely besotted, I suppose the word is, and we were like teenagers all the time, so smitten were we! Alongside that, our love for Jesus guided our lives, and the reason why I now live in the south-west of England is solely because we followed His lead and moved here on what we believed was His guidance. And I would even be so bold as to say that the fruits of that, I suppose you could call it ‘obedience’, have remained with me to this day. This is where we were supposed to be; indeed this is where I am supposed to be, right here and right now. I have lived my life under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and no-one can ever take that away from me, nor convince me otherwise. This is the effect of living the life of faith; the life in the Spirit (Gal 5:16). I say this as a declaration of fact, not as a boast of any kind. This is the only way I know how to live, and it works.

Probably the song that helped me the most, when I lost Fiona, is the gorgeous My God and King (Eyes for Only You) by Shauna Chanda. I showcased it before in my series on Fiona, but here it is once more, as my sixth song. Soak in it; feel it. You will not be disappointed.

This next track has a bit of a different slope to it. In addition to listening to Radio 4, I also listen occasionally^[19] to the station Classic FM. For reasons already explained, I love classical music and, while Classic FM do tend to play only the more popular, well-known, pieces, I do occasionally discover a real gem via that station. One such piece, for example, would be the duet from the Bizet opera The Pearl Fishers; look it up on YouTube if you’d like to hear it.

But the piece I am introducing now is one of the few classical pieces I can play; it was always a firm favourite with the audiences when I used to play it on the Blüthner grand at Coleton Fishacre when I used to volunteer there for the National Trust, some years ago.

Me at the Blüthner grand at Coleton Fishacre

It’s called The Ashokan Farewell, composed by Jay Ungar, and it was used as part of the soundtrack for the Ken Burns historical documentary ‘The Civil War‘ (1990). And I first heard it on Classic FM, although the version I heard was not this one I present today^[20]. And when I heard it, I was so entranced by it that I had to write down the title (so I would remember it!), and then go and find it and buy it as soon as I got home. The Ashokan Farewell is, without a doubt, one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever written, and its haunting melody has permeated my life since the first time I heard it. No Desert Island Discs collection compiled by me could ever be complete without it. This piece is so evocative and deep, yet so simple that I can play it; it is absolutely priceless.

This version is the definitive track from the Civil War soundtrack, performed by Jay Ungar and his wife, Molly Mason. Here we go:

For my final track, a shorter explanation will suffice. I mentioned earlier that ABBA were a huge influence on my musical style and tastes. Well, of all their songs, none means more to me than their beautiful Thank You for the Music. I have always loved this song, from the very first moment I heard it, and once I began using music in my Christian ministry, it became almost a personal worship song for me.

I mean it full well when I sing this song (apart from the line where Agnetha sings, “I am the girl with golden hair”; I’m a bloke and I have close-cropped dark hair 🤣🤣) because I really am thanking God for the music.

So, I say Thank You, [Lord], for the music, the songs I’m singing. Thanks for all the joy they’re bringing!

There is really no other song to finish with, that encapsulates it all so well: a lifetime of music and worship for which I am so deeply grateful. With this song, just as much as with any ‘proper’ worship song, hymn or chorus, I can express from the depths of my heart the gratitude for the gifting and for the lifelong lifeblood of music that flows through me. I am so thankful!

Well, that’s the songs. And so now to the other items I am ‘allowed’ to take on to my desert island with me. The Complete Works of Shakespeare, the Bible, a book of my choice, and a luxury item. And to select the one song that would mean the most.

Well, I have to say that The Complete Works of Shakespeare holds absolutely no attraction for me whatsoever. I really don’t understand what all the fuss is about Shakespeare; I don’t know, maybe this makes me some sort of infidel or something? But I think he’s vastly overrated and is indeed only held in such reverence because nobody wants to go against the general flow and say out loud how rubbish it all is. Emperor’s Clothes, and all that. I also think that most modern people, even those like me who have a classical education, feel the same – but they daren’t say it out loud. But I have no such inhibitions! No, if we’re going to have a ‘complete works of [some classical author]’, I’d much rather it was Jane Austen. She’s just brilliant. One of my favourite books ever is her classic Pride and Prejudice; I’ve read it at least eight times!

The Bible? Yeah, I can cope with that 😀

My book would have to be The Lord of the Rings, by J. R. R. Tolkien. I have read it at least fourteen times, but I am sure I could cope with reading it a few more times if I was pressed 😉

And as for my luxury item, well that would simply have to be a piano. Preferably with something to stand it on so its feet don’t sink into the sand on the island 😉 And I would prefer it if it were my own piano, which I love and which was made in 1907 and used to belong to my maternal grandfather. Failing that, a nice Steinway grand would do…. 😉

And which would be the one song that I just couldn’t do without? Well, it’s a difficult choice, for sure. But probably the one I’d pick would be ‘When I Look into Your Holiness’. That, for me, encompasses nicely the main focus of my life, which is to be close to Jesus. ‘Nuff said.

So, there we have it. My Desert Island Discs. Thankfully, I am no kind of celebrity, so I am highly unlikely to be asked to present my track list on Radio 4, and I’d probably decline if I was so asked.

Because I really don’t like the limelight…. 🤣

Footnotes[+]

Footnotes
⇧1	The best humour on Radio 4 is to be found in the programmes ‘Just a Minute‘, hosted by the brilliant Sue Perkins, and ‘I’m sorry, I haven’t a clue!‘, presented by the wonderfully deadpan Jack Dee.
⇧2	Although it has to be said that some of the tracks might well be some sort of ‘rap music’, which phrase is, to me, an oxymoron. In addition, ‘rap’ is the only word in the English language that begins with a silent ‘C’. 🤣
⇧3	This is probably to keep the show flowing properly and maintain the listener’s interest
⇧4	Or other appropriate religious or philosophical work
⇧5	Which, being Autistic and very happy with my own company most of the time, I would find quite a relief!
⇧6	They’d ‘do a turn’, which meant to get up on stage and perform.
⇧7	In that video, he talks just like I used to talk, with that broad Yorkshire accent! Unfortunately, my accent moderated somewhat once I moved south! But, regarding Pete, I saw him once, at Yeadon Constitutional Club, and I particularly remember his parting shot was “…and please do remember to take care on your way home, because ninety percent of people are caused by accidents…” – he was hilarious!
⇧8	That is, songs
⇧9	Which, while not really their own song, was made into a worldwide hit by Frank Sinatra and Nancy Sinatra
⇧10	Kay had a beautiful singing voice, and she sang in a local choir in Yorkshire until only a few months before she died at the age of over 100.
⇧11	Chords are where several related notes are all played at the same time, to create a fuller sound. This concept is easier if it’s demonstrated rather than explained in writing!
⇧12	Moon landing deniers: Don’t even bother commenting or communicating. Your comment will vanish without trace, into the nonexistence that both it, and you, deserve.
⇧13	Yes, this is similar to another ‘judicious application of…’ saying. IYKYK!🤣
⇧14	The word ‘series’ is both the singular and the plural word for ‘series’, so I don’t call them ‘serieses’ or anything like that!
⇧15	Technology like the 3.5″ floppy disc drive, first seen as the ‘data card’ in Star Trek, but which has now of course passed into history in favour of the ‘thumb drive’.
⇧16	A probably British term for music that was popular at a given point in time.
⇧17	‘Flog’ meaning to play a song repeatedly again and again ad nauseam.
⇧18	Why do some Christians always have to issue challenges to everything someone says?? It’s like they’re constantly in interrogation mode…
⇧19	Usually when Radio 4 has Gardeners’ Question Time or The Archers on 🤣😂
⇧20	The version I heard on that day was one played by the band of HM Royal Marines, with the violin solo by Capt. J R Perkins. Here it is.

Snacktime

18th December 2025Quotations, Insights, Others' stuffTony

A short collection of bite-sized quotations for your delectation. Bon appetit!

Anyone who gossips to you will also gossip about you. This is something I learned very early on in life. People have such empty lives if they have to fill it with drivel like that.
– Me

There is no good trying to be more spiritual than God. God never meant man to be a purely spiritual creature. That is why He uses material things like bread and wine to put the new life into us. We may think this rather crude and unspiritual. God does not: He invented eating. He likes matter. He invented it.

– C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity

If your intent was love, even if the [well-intentioned] action was not perceived as loving by your neighbor, your intention of love and goodwill is more powerful than the perceived failure. There is no wrongdoing in trying to do the right thing and falling short out of innocence or ignorance.
– Julie Ferewarda

“I’ve been searching, Eleanor. After all these years, believe me, I know the truth when I see it. Any faith that admires truth, that strives to know God, must be brave enough to accommodate the universe. I mean the real universe. All those light-years. All those worlds. I think of the scope of your universe, the opportunities it affords the Creator, and it takes my breath away. It’s much better than bottling Him up in one small world. I never liked the idea of Earth as God’s green footstool. It was too reassuring, like a children’s story . . . like a tranquilizer. But your universe has room enough, and time enough, for the kind of God I believe in”.
– Carl Sagan, Contact (pp. 362-363). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

“…what do we do for what is considered “sin”?” [in other people – should we call it out?] – the answer to this begins, as the original post says, right in our own hearts. We have enough of our own problems to worry about without going out to judge others’…that’s simply not our job. As a dear friend of mine once told me, “If you have a problem with me, call me. If you don’t have my number, you don’t know me well enough to have a problem with me”. I think that’s real wisdom, and of course it works both ways. People who don’t know me well enough should not be judging me, and in return, I won’t judge others that I don’t know. To be honest, I don’t judge anyone. 1Cor 2:15 says that “…the spiritual man judges all things [note: things not people!] but he himself is subject to no human judgment”. So if no-one has the right to judge me, a man of the Spirit, then I too will judge no-one else; if I do, I may be inadvertently judging another person with the Spirit. Shall not the Judge of all the Earth do what is right? (Gen 18:25) I’ll leave that to Him; it’s really not my job, nor is it anyone else’s.
– Me

“…the conviction that truth doesn’t melt when it gets warm.”
– Rhonda

[The religious spirit] glories in (what he thinks is) a magnificent parting shot, whereas in actuality it is a damp squib in the face of vastly superior firepower.
– Me

Hurt people hurt people.
Healed people heal people.
Karma’s a bitch.
Karma’s an angel.
– Jeff

“If [human religion] is making a big noise in your life by putting pressure on you, telling you that you are under law, giving you conditions to meet, placing boundaries around your life, expecting you to meet certain requirements, any requirements, tying you into terms and conditions, controlling any aspect of your lifestyle via rules, commanding you to follow him, teaching you that your identity is determined by your level of conformity to his latest dictates, demanding unswerving loyalty to whatever he tells you to believe…..

“…..then you are unlikely to hear the still, small, ever so gentle voice”.
– John Spinks

I Will Remember Him

11th November 2025PersonalTony

I always like to acknowledge Remembrance Day by posting something on Facebook about the people who have given their lives in the service of their country. Usually, I post a list of names of people of many nations, both ‘enemy’ and ‘friendly’, who died on active service, to honour their sacrifices.

This year, though, I’m going to bring it a lot closer to home, as well as posting it here on my blog. This is Trooper Brett Hall, of 2nd Battalion, Royal Tank Regiment (2RTR). Brett was 21 years old when he died of wounds received in Helmand Province, Afghanistan. His Viking armoured vehicle was hit by an insurgent’s IED (Improvised Explosive Device, basically a home-made bomb or mine), and although he was evacuated to the UK for the very best medical treatment, he died of his wounds four days later on the 16th September, 2009.

The reason this story brings it home for me is because I knew Brett. He was from Dartmouth and was one of my son Richard’s friends at Dartmouth College. He came over to our house several times and was always a real character with an hilarious sense of humour. You can see it in his face in this portrait of him in his uniform.

It’s when something like this happens, to someone in uniform that you know, that brings it home just how precious is our freedom, and how much we owe to service men and women, both current and retired, when they enable that freedom on our behalf.

Every time I visit The Tank Museum at Bovington in Dorset, which is several times a year, I visit the RTR Memorial Wall, which is just outside the entrance to the Museum.

Brett’s name is inscribed there, and I go there to pay my respects.

Brett would have been almost 40 now, and remembering him is how I make these people’s sacrifices real to me.

I will remember him. And we will remember them.

Flying in the Spirit

Doing what I see the Father doing (John 5:19)

Apocalypse – Reblog

“There are some people who will always find the angry verses in the Bible to confirm their obsession with anger and exclusion” (Steve Chalke)

Prayer and Parking Spots

Josie

Ideas…

Casting Down the Imaginations – Reblog

“Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” 2Cor10:5 (KJV)

“Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ” 2Cor10:5 (KJV)

The Doctrine of Hell

‘Angry God’

‘God Hates Gays’

The ‘Bad Witness’

The Chosen

Attack of the Love Buts

Attack of the Love Buts

My Desert Island Discs!

Snacktime

I Will Remember Him