Category Archives: Asperger’s/Autism

I Was A Stranger….

This entry is part 25 of 25 in the series The Problems of Evangelicalism
“I was a stranger, and you did not welcome Me”
– Matthew 25:43 (ESV)
Passing the Test? – A Real-Time Experiment

I have a friend who began going to a church near me – a congregation that I’d never heard of – and they suggested to me that I might like it and even want to go. And, given how much my friend was being blessed in this church, I thought I might indeed take a look.

Being Autistic, I needed to check them out a little first. Autism, for all its amazing benefits – which I would not be without! – has some downsides too, the main one for me being that I have a perception that I will not fit in because I am so ‘different’; so ‘odd’. This has been the case since my schooldays; fortunately I have spent the majority of my Christian life in congregations where they accepted me exactly as I am[1]. So I wanted to see if there’s a chance that this one will accept me like that too.

Because of this, I adopted the sensible approach, and took a look at their website. I gave particular attention to their ‘Statement of Faith’ which (usually, anyway) sets out what they believe[2].

And fair enough, there it is: they’re an Evangelical church; they believe in Biblical infallibility (that is, the Bible is always right), and in ‘eternal conscious torment’ (i.e. ‘Hell’) for those who do not believe in Jesus. All clear so far šŸ™‚

Nothing in their Statement of Faith presented any particular problem to me; no matter what church I attend, I am mature enough in my faith to be able to spit out the bones and eat the meat – to learn the things of God while internally rejecting those things that don’t sit right with my spirit in terms of doctrine or anything else. It’s a shame more Christians don’t do this! So, things look good so far 😊

But I still needed to do my Litmus Test. I have written on this before; the Litmus Test is where I ask a potentially contentious[3] question to see how they cope with it: how they answer; and indeed whether they answer!; and what they say in their answer. Using this method, I can make a pretty good guess as to how I would be welcomed despite my ‘differences’ and therefore how ‘safe’ I will feel in their group!

Because my questions have been ignored in the past, when asking other Evangelical groups the Litmus question, this time I’m going to keep track of my questions; the times I sent them, and any replies, so that my attempt at communication works out like a real-time experiment, with me writing down each ‘test’, and its result, in real time. In that way, it will read as a story; it will be productive in that you will be able to learn from what really happened, as it happened; and you will see my methodical approach to the whole thing. And I hope you enjoy it!

And so, to begin, I found their church contact page, and I simply asked them my question, via their online electronic contact form. Here’s the question as asked:


Hi there

I have been looking with interest at your church website and, in response to the things I have seen there, I wanted to ask a couple of simple questions about your practices.

Here we go:

How do you, as a church, cope with people of ā€˜different’ sexualities (like Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Queer etc. (LGBTQ+))? I have contacted churches with this question in the past, and have not once received a clear reply!

What I mean by my question is, how much do you integrate people of ā€˜alternative’ sexualities into your church? I’d really love to hear an honest answer from you on this subject.

For example, do you really preach ā€˜come as you are, don’t worry, we’ll accept you’, or is it instead the sort of thing where it’s really ā€˜come as you are but we want to change you’?

Or can an LGBTQ+ person come along and be fully accepted just as they are, without any expectation of changing to your pattern, along with any partner they may have?

Are LGBTQ+ people treated in any way differently from other people in the church? Are they fully accepted but with reservations? Would people be in any way judgmental about them?

And can an LGBTQ+ person hold a position of responsibility in your congregation?

In other words, can people feel ‘safe’ in your church?

I know that’s a lot – more than just a ‘couple’ of questions, in fact! – but I am asking all these honest questions in order to ascertain whether or not this is a safe church for all people, or just those deemed ā€˜normal’.

I look forward to reading your reply!

Thanks for your time

Anthony


So it’s Sunday 22nd March, and I’ve just sent that question off. Because this is being written in real time, I will now actually stop writing this essay for a few days, giving them until later in the week to respond, at which time I will resend the question if they haven’t already replied.


Hiding behind the Sofa!

It’s now Thursday, 26th March. Did they pass the testĀ by answering the question? Or are they hiding, terrified, behind the sofa[4], hoping that the stranger (figuratively) knocking on their door (me!) will just go away?!🤣

Well, I’m sad to say that there was no response. I am still ‘in the dark’; I don’t know if they got my message and decided to ignore it (by hiding behind the sofa!), or whether it never got there, or if they just haven’t had time to read it yet! But I’m not going to just go away. I still don’t know how ‘safe’ I would be at that church, and I would like to know because my friend’s recommendation carries considerable weight for me. So, I’m going to try again a couple of times until either they answer, or it becomes plain that not only are they still hiding behind the sofa, but have possibly even been there for so long that they have died back there and no-one has found the body yet[5] šŸ˜‚ .

And so, I am sending them the question again today (26th March):


Hi there, back on Sunday 22nd, I sent you a question about your church, and I was disappointed that I haven’t received a reply yet. I suspect you might have been on holiday! Anyway, I will re-send the question for you here, rather than have you troll through your inbox to try to find it. Here we go:

[Copied and pasted the original message in, verbatim]

So, again, let’s wait and see! Let’s also hope that the bodies behind the sofa aren’t beginning to smell too badly….


Monday, 30th March.

There’s been no response from the church yet.

It did occur to me that they may not be monitoring their communications from that contact page; their website is set up in the form of a WordPress blog (like this one) and their last posts were in December 2022, so just over three years ago. Maybe their comms aren’t being looked at, then. Maybe the guy who designed their website and monitors their comms is one of the bodies behind the sofa, and as such is terminally incapacitated 🤣

Or something.

Ok, then, let’s control that part of the experiment by sending them another, more innocuous message that doesn’t contain anything even remotely unusual. And we’ll send it via the contact form again because that’s the system we are testing with this message. I won’t write here the message I sent; suffice it to say that it was a routine sort of enquiry similar to ‘do you take a collection’ sort of thing, and giving a different email address from the one I gave for my previous messages. Who knows, maybe my other address was being blocked for some reason. You never know!

Now, if the message doesn’t get through, then no harm done; no-one will have read it. If, however, it does get through and they reply, then that tells me that they do indeed receive contact requests through their website and they are deliberately ignoring my original messages. The small subterfuge of asking a trivial question in order to try to get a message through is, in my opinion, justified[6].


Tuesday 31st March

Well, my innocuous message got a reply from the pastor! This tells me that messages sent via the online contact page are indeed being received; that they are monitoring communications sent via that page. And this leads me to believe that the Litmus Test messages I sent were actually received but were being ignored (back behind the sofa we go!). There are a couple of other possibilities. It could be that they don’t read their contact form messages all that often. That would explain the lack of response so far to my questions, but only if this is in combination with the pastor possibly needing to consult with his leadership team (if they have one; in common with most Evangelical churches, they probably do) with regards to the best line to take when replying to that impertinent LGBTQ+ query! It would need to be a combination of both late reading and working out an answer, because the receipt of the innocuous email shows that their system is working at a normal speed for electronic communications – i.e. it’s fast – so any delay in replying is a human factor. If it were me in their position, I would have written back and said something like ‘We’ll get back to you on your query; bear with us’, which would be fine. Well, kind of, anyway; if you think about it, anything other than a big, hearty ‘YES!!’ to LGBTQ+ inclusion has to be viewed as showing the strong possibility that actually they don’t accept people with ‘differences’. But let’s cut them some slack. There’s always the chance they might think in depth and come up with a decent policy.

As an aside at this point, let me also tell you something good about this church: they do welcome homeless people. Like I said, I had a friend at that church and they told me that there were all kinds of different people there, from professionals, to everyday blue-collar people, to farmers, to homeless people; you name it. I wonder then if they have any LGBTQ+ people there and, although they welcome them, they believed that my question was some sort of ruse? I mean, it isn’t; it’s a genuine question that will help me determine whether or not it is a ‘safe’ church for someone like me to attend. As I’ve already described, my neurodivergence means that I am someone who is very different from ‘normal’ people. This is why I do the Litmus Test; their attitudes towards LGBTQ+ people will be a good indicator about how they relate to ‘different’ people in general.

Another point about that church was that I recognised someone in one of their website photos, and I had actually met him a few years back – he was at work and he served me as a customer – and I justĀ knew he was a Christian because I could feel the Spirit on him. And so yes, Jesus is ‘in’ at least one person at that church! šŸ˜‰ I have no doubt that God turns up every Sunday and that the people walk with Jesus. No, sorry, I’m being facetious; I am sure that each person at that church knows the Lord, not just that one bloke. It’s just that what puzzles me is still that glaring point: so if Jesus is so much a part of their existence, like He is with me, then why the problem with answering contact requests? I still, I ehhh, well I just don’t get it. Like I said, my friend’s recommendation, and their favourable impressions of the church, do carry considerable weight for me, which is why I find it puzzling. Aaaaanyway….

Well, in order to give them another fair chance at a reply, I then actually emailed using a ‘proper’ email message, as opposed to simply contacting them through their website form. In this way, we bypass the contact form altogether. To check I had their email address right, IĀ actually drove up to their physical premises! and found out their email address from their signboard.

So I emailed them, to that ‘official’ email address, the same message that I sent on 26th March, as above, and I now await their reply. I’ll give it a few days, as per normal, before I call it a day on the experiment, write it all up and publish. I have to say, though, that by now I would be very surprised were I to receive a reply to my questions.


Right, so now it’s Tuesday 7th April, the Tuesday after Easter this year. I’ve left it so long because I did them the courtesy of not burdening them with my terrifying question over the Easter weekend and thus spoiling it! 🤣 But I still have not heard back from them – good job I didn’t hold my breath; I’d be purple by now! – and so I’m going to write to them again in a slightly different manner; in the form of a gentle appeal. I’m using direct email and writing to the church email address, and also copying in the pastor on his personal email account. Here’s what I’m sending:

Please answer my question

Hi there

Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve been hoping for a reply from you regarding my question – sent several times and via different pathways – via your church contact page, and via direct email to your church email address which I got from the signboard outside your premises – about to what extent LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and other sexualities) people are integrated into your church. In my contact attempts, I set out clearly my questions, and gave a clear and valid reason why I am asking those questions.

It saddens me greatly that I have not yet received a reply. I do believe that the messages have been getting through to you, so I can see only five possible reasons for the lack of a reply:

1) I was wrong; the messages are not in fact getting through to you;
2) The messages are getting through to you, but you are on holiday or very busy, or both;
3) You suspect that my neutrally-expressed question is from someone who would not want to come to your church if they thought that LGBTQ+ people *were* welcome there;
4) You suspect that LGBTQ+ people would not want to come to your church if they thought they would *not* be welcome there, but you don’t want to put them off by telling them that;
5) You and your leadership team are as yet undecided on your stance on LGBTQ+ issues, or at least on how to respond to my questions. In which case, please acknowledge this with a simple, ‘We’ll get back to you’, unless of course you’re not going to get back to me!

Whatever the reason, I would like to make a final request that you answer my question, please, and, in its shortened form, it’s this:

*To what extent are LGBTQ+ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and other sexualities) people integrated into your church?*

I have deliberately done you the courtesy of not burdening you with this over what is likely the busiest weekend in your church’s calendar!

I won’t trouble you with the question again after asking this time. That said, though, this isn’t going to just go away. Even though this is the last time I will ask, someone else will ask you again, sooner or later.

I hope this time to hear back from you.

Thanks

Anthony

Note how I have simplified it down to just ‘to what extent are LGBTQ+ … people integrated into your church?’ I also gave him five reasonable ‘excuses’. I really am trying to be gracious here!

Again, let’s wait and see…


Well, Saturday 11th April has dawned and still no word. Because they could indeed have gone on holiday after surviving the hectic Easter weekend – which is a realistic possibility – I am going to leave it until Monday 13th April before I publish this. Let’s give them every chance!

But in the meantime, let’s just consider the ‘no-reply’ reasons that I suggested in the email above. We may be able to glean something that might explain why I haven’t heard anything back.

1) I was wrong; the messages are not in fact getting through to you

This is not the reason; I know from the ‘innocuous question’ test that I asked that the mails are getting through to them.

2) The messages are getting through to you, but you are on holiday or very busy, or both

This is possible, which is why I’ve given them so long before publishing. But given that I copied my final email to the pastor’s personal email account as well as the church one, I’d have thought that it would have got through to someone at least. If I do hear back at a later date, and they were/are still on holiday, then I will update this essay to reflect that. Can’t say fairer than that.

3) You suspect that my neutrally-expressed question is from someone who would not want to come to your church if they thought that LGBTQ+ people *were* welcome there

…or (I will lump these two reasons together)

4) You suspect that LGBTQ+ people would would not want to come to your church if they thought they would *not* be welcome there, but you don’t want to put them off by telling them that

In other words, they are worried that I might not like their answer, for either of those reasons or maybe some other reason. In which case, if they’re in any doubt, they should ask for me to clarify the question, and not just ignore the email. Another church I once asked this question of, at least offered to come and have a chat with me, which I graciously declined. Now that’s the way to handle this if they’re in any doubt. But, especially regarding the opinions of other believers as I mentioned in point (3), it is worth mentioning that the fear of man (and man’s opinions) has to do with voluntarily placing the ownership of our lives into the hands of men, whether we realise it or not. We change our behaviour in order to be accepted. Well, there’s no need to do that, not ever. Jesus didn’t do it, and neither should we. It’s not about pleasing men at all, not even other believers who want you to conform. Your life, your reputation, your ministry, and your church belong to God, not to the people who would try to judge you. Proverbs 29:25 (KJV) says that ā€œThe fear of man bringeth a snare but whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safeā€. It’s worth remembering that.

5) You and your leadership team are as yet undecided on your stance on LGBTQ+ issues, or at least on how to respond to my questions. In which case, please acknowledge this with a simple, ‘We’ll get back to you’, unless of course you’re not going to get back to me!

This would kind-of be fair enough, and, again, if they need to decide on something, then maybe they will contact me later – I will update the essay if they do. But there was also no ‘we’ll get back to you’ note either, so I seriously doubt I’ll hear back unless, as we’ve already considered, holidays.

There’s a sixth reason that I left out of the email because it’s not all that polite; remember I was trying to be reasonable, a) in the hope of getting an answer and also b) to not want to offend a brother in Christ. And that sixth reason is that they just decided to ignore the problem and hope it will go away. It’s very cosy behind that there sofa…. šŸ¤£šŸ¤£šŸ›‹ļø Well, I might go away, but my writing won’t šŸ˜‚ This is the cowardly approach, to put it bluntly. What would it have cost them to reply to me? And even if the cost was huge, in whatever terms, would it not be worth it in order to rescue a ‘sinner’ from the pit?

There’s also the additional possibility that they think it’s all a joke or a ruse; that I’m just trying to wind them up, provoke them, or something else – maybe they thought I was a militant anti-Christian just using the LGBTQ+ question as a way of starting an argument! – and therefore to reply would be to feed the trolls. Well, in response to that, I’d say that while in this piece I have indeed tried to keep a humourous slant on most of the prose[7], the question was not asked as a joke, nor as a wind-up or provocation, and nor should it be assumed to be one. It should be standard practice to treat seriously any question from a new/unknown contact, unless and until they know for sure that it was a joke or something worse. As we have seen in my explanations above, the questions were genuine in that I was trying to ascertain how ‘safe’ the church would be for me, and that was clearly expressed in my original messages. That I could write it up, in the same manner as if it were an experiment, is simply my way of trying to make sense of it using the analytical mind that God has given me. So, it’s not a ruse; it is a perfectly valid question, asked for a real and clearly-stated reason.

To sum up all that blather: There’s just no excuse!


Monday 13th April, in the evening. Ok, still no reply after yet another week. In fact it’s been like three weeks now, just over. I’d say it’s time to stop the experiment, and publish my results.

And I will also send them the reassurance that I will not be bothering them again:

Lessons Learned

Hi [Pastor’s name]

Well, you’ll be pleased to know I won’t be asking you that LGBTQ+ question again. It’s sad that you didn’t feel that you could reply, by hey-ho; I’m sure you had your reasons.

I had hoped for better; [I then shared something personal which I won’t go in to in public, but it’s about me identifying with the pastor as a brother and fellow human].

Anyway, I asked the LGBT question because I was thinking of coming to your church, and I needed to know how safe it is for people who are ‘different’, as I openly said in my initial messages.

I’ll tell you straight off that I am not gay, nor am I of any other ‘alternative’ sexuality. I am actually autistic, and I have several personal disability issues that make it very hard for me to be in a public place, because I am so ‘different’. The LGBTQ+ question is simply a litmus test that I use in order to try to find out whether or not I will feel comfortable attending a church, despite my differences.Ā 

And I had so much to give. I am a recently retired NHS professional and with a classical education; I have a Bible college qualification; and I have formal qualifications in theology. On 12th July this year, I will have been walking in love and power with Jesus for 46 years. I am a highly experienced and talented Charismatic worship leader, having led countless worship meetings varying in size from housegroups up to congregations of hundreds of people. I am a gifted musician, and I have also done much public preaching work. I have had extensive training and experience in ministering in spiritual gifts, with proven proficiency in words of knowledge, in prophetic ministry, and in spoken and written word, doing only what I see my Father doing. I have even ministered on a couple of occasions at Brunel Manor. However, I do not put my good works on show; I do not do things for human approval, so you’ll not have heard of me. I’m just a humble minister of Jesus who practises His work quietly and behind the scenes; I am one who does the will of his Father in Heaven.

Sad to say, then, that the lack of any answer to my question has made me completely sure that I will not attend your church, unless of course the Lord tells me very clearly that He wants me to do so.

I was a stranger, and you would not take me in. You wouldn’t even answer my serious question.

I have written this experience up factually, and have published it on my blog at

[Gave him the link to this article]

I haven’t named anyone, neither church nor individual. Jesus doesn’t work like that, and neither do I.

Grace and Peace to you and, despite your failure to respond to me, I pray every blessing on your ministry; Grace is not dependent on behaviour. We will meet in Glory, but likely not before.

Shalom, shalom

Anthony

I might get a reply; I might not. Probably not, given their previous record. And to be honest I’m not bothered whether I do or I don’t. I simply would not want to be a part of their congregation; I just can’t be doing with rudeness like that. And from fellow brothers in Christ too!

Conclusion:

The bottom line for the experiment, then, is this: TheyĀ fail the test.

They fail to convince me that they are a church where Jesus would fraternise with ‘tax collectors and sinners’. If this were not so, then they would have proved it to me, simply by replying to my question. Sure, they may have homeless people there. But that’s not the whole story, as well they will know. Had they been an ‘accepting’ church, then they’d have given their questioner the benefit of the doubt, should any doubt exist. It seems to me that, in their church, judgment triumphs over mercy. And by comparing that attitude with their Rulebook, in James 2:13, I’d say they’ve got that back-to-front from how God wants it.

But it answers my question. It’s not a church I could go to, simply because I would not feel safe there. They failed to be up-front about a simple question; there’s no telling what it would be like to actually be in that congregation. So I won’t be going. I wouldn’t dream of attending a church where such an offensive attitude is displayed towards complete strangers. This is Evangelicalism at its worst[8].

Because they were not upfront about answering the question, to me that demonstrates that they are just as closeted and inward-looking as any of the other more culty Evangelical congregations. They will claim that they want to be a ‘witness for Jesus’, and they’ll want to try to grow their church by dragging in more ‘converts’, but this will happen slowly and at the end of the day their converts will be ‘..twice the sons of Gehenna that [they] are’ (Mt 23:15), because they will have to conform to the societal norm within that group – which is to be inward-looking. I have had long experience with groups like that, both from inside and out, and they look to be just the same old, same old as other groups I have been part of.

No, these people have nothing to offer me; there is nothing good for me here, and, conversely, I am sure that anything I bring from my own storehouses would not be welcomed by them. And so, I have nothing to offer them either. If they had wanted my ‘services’, based on what looks quite like a resumĆ© on my final message to them šŸ˜‚ then that message would have been responded to in, shall we say, positive terms. I have also noticed that groups like this are absolutely terrified of people with ‘proper’ theological qualifications, even though these qualifications, in and of themselves, don’t really mean anything in terms of spirituality. I think it threatens their internal power and authority structures, but that’s just my personal opinion. These are people who are afraid of proper theology because it could end up changing, even if only slightly, their cherished beliefs; in short, they are not going to be teachable[9].

Also, the complete lack of any answer to the question, “…to what extent are LGBTQ+ people integrated into your church?”, means that the answer is actually this: They’re not.

And therefore they will also likely have difficulties in accepting people like me, with my ‘differences’. The Litmus Test has done its job and saved me from a world of hurt!

So, to sum up:

I was a stranger[10] and they would not welcome me. For whatever reason, they will not answer my reasonable question even though their systems are working.

Do they think that Jesus would be pleased with that attitude, given that He said that inasmuch as they didn’t do it for the least of these, they didn’t do it for Him?

I will leave you to ponder….

Grace and Peace to you all


As part of the process of writing this article, I also thought of a lot of things that might be useful for churches and their leadership who might be interested in beginning to accommodate LGBTQ+ and other ‘different’ people in their congregations. The work is pretty unpolished but it might be useful, and so I have published it as an Appendix below.


I Was A Stranger – Part II – Appendix
Discussion, Ramifications and Recommendations

(What it means if you hide behind the sofa!)

I wanted the results of the experiment to be constructive: for me; for my readers; and for the leadership of that church if they do follow the link that I gave them. And, indeed, I also want it to be constructive – indeed ‘edifying! – for any person in a position of church leadership who might read the essay. If I am highlighting faults with the attitudes of Evangelicals, or indeed of any church, towards the full acceptance, or otherwise, of LGBTQ+ people, then it wouldn’t be right to just present the problems without proposing some solutions as well.

Let me begin by explaining that LGBTQ+ inclusion is becoming a major hot-potato issue in the church worldwide, and not just in Evangelicalism. Here’s an excellent quotation from Bill White:

“…non-Christians are asking the L.G.B.T.Q. question before they even enter the door as a litmus test[11] 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 ā€œsecond-class citizenship.ā€
– Bill White

I also found some good evidence of groups who not only see and appreciate the problem, but they also do something about it. For example (and it’s well worth reading carefully, and in detail):

“[In our group] there are no tricks, no half-measures, no false promises, no crossed fingers when it comes to our welcome, affirmation, and celebration of LGBTQ+ people. We affirm the LGBTQ community in all its variations, colors, identities, and expressions”

– The Faith Community (link is here)

That’s what I would call the proper attitude for a congregation who really want to welcome the ‘tax collectors and sinners’ that Jesus had no problems with welcoming and associating with (Mt 9:10). It’s important, then, for modern Christianity in general, and Evangelicalism in particular, to get up to speed with the issues that are caused when LGBTQ+ and other ‘odd’ groups are discriminated against in the church.

Maybe you might think I was hounding that church in my original essay, by asking the Litmus question several times. But I wasn’t. I had a genuine question that, as a potential new congregant, was perfectly valid and perfectly reasonable – and they should have answered it. In essence, it’s no different to asking them if they take a collection/offering, or what kinds of songs they sing. There was no need for them to hide what they think, nor is there any need for them to hunker down behind the titular item of furniture. If they have an existing ‘policy’ (for want of a better term), then they should just get it out there and tell me. If they don’t have a policy, then that’s what they should tell me. If someone asked, ‘Do you serve coffee afterwards?’, I’m sure that would have received a prompt reply. I mean, I haven’t even said I am gay or anything; I have simply asked how they integrate LGBTQ+ people into their group. And that’s all.

As my readers will know, I am a veteran Christian, coming up on 46 years of walking with the Lord; Bible-college trained and with a classical education including formal qualifications in theology; and with decades of experience in the anointed leading of Charismatic worship meetings, playing live instruments, doing musical ministry. I have a gentle, pastoral outlook that just wants to bless people; I just want to be Jesus to others. I’m not going to be modest here: I’d have been a real catch! But of course they didn’t know that. All they see is someone asking an awkward question about how well LGBTQ+ people are accepted. Surely not a major threat[12], nor any reason to not reply?

I don’t know; maybe they think I am gay myself, and therefore it doesn’t matter if this ‘sinner’ doesn’t come along; best be shot of me even before I begin with them! Maybe they’ve forgotten that Jesus Himself welcomed ‘sinners’, including prostitutes!, much to the chagrin of the Religious of His day. Maybe they are scared of damage to their reputation with other Evangelical Christians if they were to do likewise. Guilt by association. Jesus wasn’t bothered by that, and neither should any Christian be.

Well, here are some suggestions for people in leadership of this kind of church, who have been patient enough to have read this far. Kudos to you, if you’re one of them! The suggestions are meant to be constructive, but sadly many Evangelicals would consider them to be anything but. However, I’ll try. The points are raised in no particular order of importance and they are not necessarily linked conceptually with previous points. I probably even repeat myself on occasion. These points aren’t supposed to be a polished treatise like my other pieces, or even the main essay; they’re more of a ‘thought shower’.

  • Nowadays, more and more people are using this question, or a similar one, as a litmus test for churches. If you want to get people in to your church, you need to think right now about how you’re going to answer it, and what ramifications, and indeed consequences, your answer will have with regard to the growth and relevance of your church. And you need to have that answer ready.
  • I understand it that you don’t want to compromise in any way. On the one hand, you don’t want to ‘water down’ the ‘whole counsel of God'[13](Acts 20:27) because it’s “…the world that needs to change and not the Bible”. On the other hand, you also don’t want to tell the whole truth because you know that the truth, as you understand it, is unpalatable to ‘sinners’.Ā  So, what do you do? Do you risk compromise by ‘watering it down’ to make it more palatable, or do you insist on your (likely to be unpopular) interpretation and put people off coming? If we’re being honest, you likely don’t want such awkwardly-different people in your group anyway. And so maybe you need to look again at the doctrinal points that you hold on to so tightly, why you hold them, and whether or not you can let go of them because they are not part of an unchanging truth; maybe they are simply ‘doctrines made by men’? (Mt 15:9) These are exactly the things that Jesus was talking about in that verse in Matthew; and these doctrines actually cause others to stumble.
When you find your belief system to be the thing keeping you from becoming a better person, summon the courage to become a better person than your beliefs.– Jeff Turner
  • Related to the above, remember that most if not all firmly held doctrines are based on someone’s (an individual’s or a group’s) interpretation of what various Scripture passages mean, when those Scripture passages were not originally written to us today anyway[14]. This is why dogmatic adherence to fixed, set-in-stone doctrines is not a good thing, especially when others are damaged, hurt or excluded by those same doctrines. The first few chapters of the Acts of the Apostles tells the story of a group of people whose faith (which isn’t even called ‘Christianity yet at this stage in the story) has taken a remarkable turn from their previous faith of Judaism, and their ideas are still in a fluid state and they’re trying to come to terms with it all. This is the normal state of being for people (i.e. you and me) who are constantly trying to make sense of the whirlwind of amazing things that God is doing in our time, just as He was doing back then in their time! So, what it should look like for people who claim they want to ‘be like the early Church’ is that they should be constantly changing the way they relate their faith to society, and be in a constant state of fluidity. Solid doctrines don’t really have a place when God is constantly moving; concrete foundations are not very mobile.
  • Remember that the people you are rejecting, or causing to stay away – which amounts to the same thing – are Jesus. “Inasmuch as you did not do this for the least of these, you did not do it for Me” (Mt 25:45). And especially, in my case, where I am a stranger – you don’t know me – and you did not welcome me Mt 25:43). You didn’t even say, Come along anyway and judge for yourself’, which would have been far better in terms of acceptance and even Scriptural – see John 1:45-46. Yes, you love Him; that’s not in doubt here. But you also need to love these people unconditionally – without conditions of any kind – just the same as God loves you. That’s part of what Grace means.
  • You may well be afraid, generally, of presenting a ‘bad witness’, by being seen doing things like smoking or swearing, but this is worse. Here, you are displaying a lack of transparency, the appearance of trying to hide things (or at least not declare things up-front, which amounts to the same thing) and indeed a knowledge or a suspicion of, yes, just how absurd and out-of-date many of your ideas are. But you need to rethink your idea of ‘the word of the Lord endureth forever’ (1Pet1:25; Ps 119:89; Isa 40:8), and apply that Scriptural concept properly and contextually in your lives and beliefs.
  • By not answering perfectly valid questions such as mine, you show a great disrespect for your questioner, because you are showing that their question is not worthy of an answer. In fact, I personally feel quite devalued in human terms, if I’m honest. I didn’t deserve to be ignored. You have devalued me even without meeting me, which is really quite an achievement! I would say that your stubborn ignorance in this case made me realise that you are not the kind of group I would feel safe joining anyway, for several reasons – not least the strong potential for rejection. So I am also glad that you ignored the question, because now I have not had to waste emotional energy on developing relationship, only to have it all count for nothing further down the line.
  • You are also demonstrating pre-judgmentalism, where you have judged the assumed motives or alignment of your questioner’s heart, but without sufficient evidence or personal context. God knows your questioner, and values them individually and personally. And so should you, if you claim to live in Him (1Jn2:6).
  • You will miss out on the unique gifts and talents of people who would have been able to give much to your congregation, both to your enrichment and to theirs. And that’s without you ever knowing them, irrespective of whether they were gay or not.
  • You may well pride yourself in the people you accept. Maybe you accept homeless people alongside mansion-dwellers, and that’s great. But if you reject certain types of people for other reasons – and let’s face it, those reasons are subject to your own personal decisions (we will accept homeless but no gays, thank you very much) – then you are no different from other churches who also reject people for their own, different, reasons and criteria. Maybe you feel better for being a church that does not reject the homeless, whereas ‘that lot down the road’ won’t let someone join the church unless they drive a BMW. Well, by rejecting LGBTQ+ people, and even innocent and valid questions about your church’s attitudes towards them, you demonstrate that you are, in fact, just as bad as ‘that lot down the road’ 🤣 . Acceptance based on behaviour is judgmentalism. If you accept me despite being ‘weird’ due to my autism, but don’t accept LGBTQ+ people, then you are showing a selectivity based on your perception of a person’s worthiness based on their behaviour or inclinations – and this is not a selectivity that God has. You do not reflect your Father in Heaven if you behave like this.
  • You may see this entire thing as being a persecution, or an ‘attack’ from the Enemy. Most Christian organisations, who are entrenched in their beliefs, oass off any criticism (even that intended to be constructive) as such, so that they feel justified in ignoring it. But fellow believers can also make edifying comments and criticisms that are supposed to help you. Iron sharlens iron, and all that (Prov 27:17). This means that the essay is possibly prophetic for you, in a similar way to how the prophet Nathan ministered to King David in 2 Sam 12. If this is the case, then you will have to ask the Lord what He wants you to do with the things you have read here, if indeed you have the ears to hear. Accept or reject? Spit out the bones and eat the meat (i.e. accept some of it, reject some of it)? Either way, do not miss out on what the Lord wants to do with your congregation in order to help you bear more fruit for Him.
  • Remember that, in damaging your own reputation, you are also damaging God’s reputation. So much of your effort is spent on not being a ‘Bad Witness’, and yet, sadly, this is exactly what happens when you a) are not transparent, b) ignore sincere questioners, and c) reject LGBTQ+ people – people that Jesus certainly would not have rejected, and that He died for while they were still ‘sinners’ (Rom 5:8).
  • Like it or not, ‘the World’ aren’t stupid; they know what Jesus looks like, despite the best efforts of the church to misrepresent Him. And in many ways I’m afraid they know what He looks like better than you do, because your vision is skewed by the rules you have to keep. And this means that they will not see Jesus in your congregation, because you do not behave like the Friend of Sinners. Whoever claims to live in Him must walk as Jesus did (1Jn2:6). In your zeal to remain faithful to the Bible, you are neglecting other more important parts of that same word. Woe to you Pharisees neglecting the important parts (Mt 23:23). In effect, you shut the door of Heaven in men’s faces (Mt 23:13). Ignoring a valid and polite question, which came with a clear explanation of its purpose, tells me that you have something to hide. Is it not a colossal red flag where any group, not just a church, is anything less than fully transparent when it comes to openly and unambiguously stating their beliefs?
  • If one of your main objectives is to save people from Hell – and I am assuming that a) you believe in Hell and therefore b) this is indeed your objective – then surely any changes you need to make with regard to the way you relate to people – any people – must be worth it? According to Jesus, it’s the sick who need a doctor (Lk 5:31). And in the way that you acknowledge that you yourselves are ‘sinners in need of a saviour’, you proclaim that not only do you need that Doctor too – don’t we all?! – but also that your particular need for the Doctor does not disqualify you from, for example, full inclusion in the Church, whereas others’ needs for that same Doctor – like being gay, for example – does disqualify them. If all sin is equal in God’s sight[15] then you yourselves are no ‘better’ than those you would disqualify from full inclusion and involvement in your congregation. If all sin is equal in God’s sight, then either you should not disqualify LGBTQ+ people from full inclusion including holding positions of responsibility in the congregation, or you yourselves should not hold such positions. According to your own rules, their ‘sin’ is no worse than your ‘sin’ in God’s sight. In some ways, they’re even doing better than you are: at least their ‘sin’ is out in the open. Only you and God know of your own ‘secret sins’ that you struggle with every day; these are not out in the open[16]. You know exactly which sins I am talking about.
    Don’t you?
  • If you discriminate (because that’s what it amounts to) against people in certain groups, like LGBTQ+ people, or smokers, or those with tattoos, for example, then you are declaring yourselves to be somehow ‘better’ than they are; somehow more ‘deserving’ of God’s Love and Grace. As your Rulebook says, you know that you should not consider yourselves better than others (Phil 2:3, Rom 12:3). In Micah 6:8, where it says,

“He has shown you, O Man, what is good
And what does the Lord require of you?
To do justice
And to love mercy
And to walk humbly with your God”

…you need to remember that part of walking humbly with God involves not considering others to be in any way inferior to yourself, and you also probably don’t know that God is non-discriminatory in the way in which He gives His Grace. You see, if they don’t deserve it, then neither do you. Fortunately, though, Grace is not so much undeserved (which I know is the standard Evangelical line) so much as it is unearned – nothing you have ever done, nothing you are doing, and nothing you will ever do will make you any more or less worthy to receive God’s Grace. It is a free gift – by definition, a gift is free; who ever paid for their own gift? – and, unlike the standard threat to kids at Christmas where parents tell their child that if you do not behave, then it’s no presents for you, God does not have a naughty list (Heb 8:12). It doesn’t matter if you’ve been naughty or nice; God gives His Grace and His gifts freely to those who do not deserve them, either by actions or by inclinations.Ā And the same criteria apply to those that YOU deem unworthy! But, you might argue, does that mean that a person can ‘sin’ as much as they like and God will still like them? Well, go and honestly work it out, is all I will say on that matter. Ask God for wisdom (Jas 1:5). I could give you some pointers, especially to my own articles, but this is the sort of thing you need to work out for yourself so that you can own your own conclusions.

  • Whether you like it or not, all Christians are one Body in Christ (Gal 3:28). This includes every believer, gay or not, smoker or not, alcoholic or not, gambler, adulterer, whatever. We are one Body. And you have no right to exclude some members of the Body on the basis of your own beliefs, whether or not you consider these as being Scripture-based. Remember you could be wrong, even if your beliefs are based in Scripture. You may think that ‘God never goes against what is written in Scripture’, but that is incorrect, because when Jesus said things like, “You have heard that it is written [something], however I say to you [something different]”, that’s exactly what He was doing; He was going against Scripture. Unless of course you are claming that Jesus isn’t God, which is something that I very much doubt that you would do!
  • Your idea that ‘whoever approves of these things shares in his evil work'[17] is a man-made concept derived from context-dependent verses from two particular letters in the Bible – these verses are found in 2 John 11 and Romans 1:32. Many Christians use these verses to justify lumping in people who support ‘sinners’ with the ‘sinners’ themselves. Well, you will have to decide. Do you go with your interpretation of St. John’s or St. Paul’s verses, then, or do you emulate Jesus who associated with ‘tax collectors and sinners’ without mentioning their ‘sin’; without bringing it up at all in fact. The Religious of His time saw His association with these people as tacit approval of their ‘behaviour’ or their ‘sin’. How is that different, then, from you saying that whoever approves of, say, gay people, ‘shares in their evil work’? (2 John 11; Rom 1:32 (another verse that is routinely and blatantly ripped out of context) ) Jesus accepted unacceptable people; He accepted those rejected by the religious. He even died for you while you were still sinners. Should not your attitude be the same?
  • People are more likely to want to come to your meetings if they know they’re not going to be judged or looked down on. Your attitude to LGBTQ+ people models what your attitude would be towards anyone who doesn’t fit in, for whatever reason. Remember that outsiders see Christians as people who love to judge others[18]. Outsiders want to know whether or not, should they join your ranks, they can lead a fulfilling church life including everything they are called to. But they’re gay, then you’re not letting them do that, are you? If it means compromising, then compromise, in the name of Love. Let mercy triumph over judgment (Jas 2:13)!
  • When thinking about caring for ‘the least of these, it is important to note that caring,Ā  also includes valuing them as a person, no matter how ‘unworthy’ you consider them to be, by extending to them the same Grace that God extended to you when you (as you see it) weren’t worthy either. You have become so steeped in religious language, rules and procedures that you have forgotten what it’s like to be a person – say a sympathetic unbeliever or one who is considering believing – on the fringes. Holding these people at arms’ length is, again, shutting the doors of Heaven in men’s faces (Mt 23:13)
  • Let’s do a thought experiment. Just imagine for one moment being a gay person. You join the church, and you ‘become a Christian’. You begin attending a church, and you begin to form close and meaningful friendships with church members, and you invest time and money and talents into the church. No-one knows you’re gay because it just never occurred to you to tell them. But then, you find out (only two months after becoming a Christian) that god hates gays[19]. And he also hates those who affirm them, because guilt by association of course. So, now what do you do? In all innocence, you’ve joined this group of people who will suddenly all[20] have a beef against you. And you wish someone had told you before you joined their group, because now you have a ton of hurt, judgment and rejection to cope with, and you as a new, fledgling Christian who doesn’t know how to cope with all these ‘solid’ Christians telling you how wrong you are and how you have to change or leave. **Thought Experiment Ends!** Think: How would that situation make you feel? Can you see the problem here, in relation to the subject of this essay?
  • I think it’s also a reasonable conclusion that not only would you as a church not be good with LGBTQ+ people, but neither would you be good with those who support and affirm them. So, look at that! You’ve just alienated two groups of people that Jesus loves, for the price of one! Congratulations! Remember that your brother Christians whoĀ do affirm LGBTQ+ people are not ‘fallen away’; they are not ‘backslidden’ nor is it the case that ‘they were never true Christians in the first place’. Chances are they said the exact same ‘sinner’s prayer’ that you did, and have lived a Christian life very similar to yours in most respects. Maybe, then, it’s just that they have been listening to Jesus – Who, rememberĀ does contradict Scripture when it suits Him (see above) – and He has shown them His heart towards LGBTQ+ people. Maybe their hearts have grown in their walk with Him, and are now more aligned with His heart in this regard. That’s no reflection on you; no-one’s saying that you’re not a Christian or anything like that, or that you don’t listen to Him. It’s just that He has explained to them things that either He hasn’t told you yet, or He has and you weren’t listening or didn’t want to hear. Either way, He’s told them things that you haven’t heard yet, and that’s fine. Maybe now is the time when He wants to tell you these things, maybe not; I wouldn’t presume to tell you that. You will have to listen to Him for yourself.
ā€œIf 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.ā€
– Jeff Turner
  • What are you hiding and why? And are you hiding other stuff too? Shouldn’t you be shouting your acceptance and inclusion of ‘tax collectors and sinners’ from the roof tops? Jesus welcomed everyone! Churches who are not upfront about this sort of thing are a red flag; what else are they not telling people?
  • At the end of the day, your failure to even respond to, much less answer, my question, is indicative of cowardice. Yes, you’re hiding behind the sofa! I am guessing that you, like many Christians of the Evangelical persuasion, are running on fear rather than Love. This is the dark side of the coin with such a real and fervent belief as Evangelicalism gives. Yes, there is a real belief in God, in how much He loves us, and that He demonstrated that in Christ Who died for us while we were still sinners (Romans 5:8). God is real, Jesus is alive and lives in us, and we know that (well most of us do, anyway) by His Spirit. That’s the bright side of the coin. But that strong belief and faith has a potential dark side as well. It means that if God is indeed real – and our experiences with Him tell us that He is – then it also means that He’s entirely the wrong person to cross, to annoy, because of how powerful He is. He could wipe us out without even thinking about it. In other words, for some Evangelicals, their relationship is based onĀ fear rather thanĀ Love[21]. People who believe that seem to think it’s too good to be true that God just accepts us as we are; surely there must be some sort of threat or fear or something involved? But Jesus demonstrated that no, that’s not the case at all. Jesus’s best friend, John the Apostle, put it like this,”And we have come to know and believe the love that God has for us. God is love; whoever abides in love abides in God, and God in him. In this way, love has been perfected among us, so that we may have confidence on the day of judgment; for in this world we are just like Him. There is no fear in love, but perfect love drives out fear, because fear involves punishment. The one who fears has not been perfected in love”. (1Jn4:12 (NLT), emphasis mine) This is pretty straightforward to me, and if you want to choose the opposite, then that’s your loss. But if you dare to believe that although it seems too good to be true, it is actually true that God loves you and is not mad with you. This means, then, that He will not smite you or those you love, like a cosmic crime boss, just because you choose to pick the way of loving others, rather than rejecting them. Those who reject others are amongst those to whom Jesus says, in the Parable of the Sheep and the Goats, “Away from Me, I never knew you!”, because when you rejected the least of these, you rejected Him.
  • Parallel to the fear of God is the fear of Men. Time after time, in the Gospels, Jesus tells his listeners that the opinions of other humans are not important. His teachings against those who pray in public to gain ‘cred’ with onlookers. Those who ostentatiously tip huge amounts of money into the temple coffers to demonstrate their spirituality. And there are others. Paul mentioned it too. And there’s the verse in Proverbs 29:25 which says that,
    “Fear of man will prove to be a snare,
    but whoever trusts in the Lord is kept safe”
    Refusal to answer my question based on your fear of judgment from other Christians is in opposition to that Proverb. Additionally, 1Cor2:15 says that the spiritual man is subject to no human judgment. So, what on Earth is it that you’re worried about?
    I’m sure that God will continue to come along to your meetings; that He’ll continue to bless you no matter what, simply because He’s like that.
  • Your lack of a reply also tells me how you might cope with people with doctrinal differences – in short, you wouldn’t!
  • You need to learn how to bring out new treasures as well as the old (Mt 13:52). The old really is old; it is tired, dusty and samey, and belongeth back in the nineteenth century where it doth originate. You have drained all the life and love out of your faith; all the vibrancy, and settled for a dull, grey, comfortable sameness where all your boundaries are defined and known. You believe essentially the same things now as they did 100 years ago, back when the mobile device you might be reading this on, right now, would have been seen as sorcery. You need to adjust to society, while giving serious thought to how relevant your interpretation of Scripture is in today’s world. You may not realise this, but many of today’s accepted ‘norms’, both in society and in religion, were once completely unacceptable. Gradually, even Christianity changes in order to ‘allow’ things that weren’t previously ‘allowed’. Failure to change with the times is not a virtue; a praiseworthy ‘sticking to the Scriptures’. It is in fact sticking to the old ways where Scripture actually does not designate such old ways as being ‘correct’ nor does it forbid doing things in new ways. Even deeper than that, the Scripture is fully capable of adapting, and being adapted, to whichever society or time period it finds itself in. What they believed back in the fifteenth century was very different to what we believe now, in just about every aspect of society. To adapt your behaviour and beliefs so that the Scripture is relevant in today’s society is actually to honour it, not to relegate it to irrelevance. This is one of the great beauties of Scripture, and to not allow it to do that is to do it a great disservice.
Concluding comments

And my final conclusion is this: No. That church is not a safe place, either for LGBTQ+ people or, for that matter, for anyone else who is ‘different’. This experiment has exposed red flags galore in this church; even just their simple refusal to answer a single harmless question tells me so much.

No, sooner or later, if you are a person who, for whatever reason, does not fit in, say by being the kind of person who might ask a slightly awkward question, then I can guarantee that you will suffer some kind of spiritual abuse in this church. Maybe not right away, when they want to indoctrinate you in order to ‘keep’ you, during the ‘honeymoon period’, but further down the line; it will happen. Maybe minor abuse, maybe major; the point is it will happen. If they have something to hide, then red flags they be a’flyin’; I’mma stay well away!

The only solution for these churches, if they want to continue to be relevant, is to offer full acceptance in every way, to everyone. In twenty years’ time, people will look back at the attitudes of Christians in this time and say, ‘Why were they so reluctant?’

Grace and Peace to you.

Further Help

If you have been challenged, encouraged or helped by this article, or if you are a member or supporter of the LGBTQ+ community, and you’re wondering if there are indeed churches in the UK who do support LGBTQ+ equality, then please check out the groups linked below to see how they do things. If you’re looking for a local congregation, well even if they don’t have a congregation near you, they may well be able to put you in touch with someone in your area who has similar values. Such churches are more than likely to be accommodating of people with all kinds of ‘differences’. One day, many more churches will do things this way!

Reimagine Church, Nottingham

Oasis Waterloo

 

 

 

Footnotes

Footnotes
1 Although, as I have written in other posts, maybe this was because of my brilliant musical gifting; another Autistic trait! They’d put up with me if it meant I would play the piano for them… šŸ˜‰
2 On such websites, I also always look for their Safeguarding Policy. I am sad to have to report that such vital information is usually missing from most church websites I have checked out. There have been some I have found, though, that are really quite proud of their safeguarding systems, and they proclaim those systems openly and enthusiastically! And that’s great. 😁 Religious organisations, more than anyone else, should set up safeguarding as a matter of priority, given the strong association between religious organisations and child sexual abuse as well as other forms of abuse. Lack of a safeguarding policy is always a massive red flag to me, either because they haven’t thought of having one (unlikely given today’s litigious climate); they don’t think it’ll ever happen to them (they’re too righteous for that sort of thing ever to happen in their church!); they don’t want to be under someone else’s scrutiny (so, it’s a leadership accountability/power issue); or because it’s actually going on in their midst and they don’t want to prevent it (sick but possible; ’nuff said). Or maybe a combination of the above. I can think of no other reason why a church will not have a publicly available safeguarding policy set out clearly on their website. And that’s pretty poor really. Oh, btw, this church didn’t have one; not that I could find, anyway.
3 It’s ‘potentially contentious’ because, for some, churches, the question I ask will be a non-issue; for others, not so much.
4 The original title for this piece was going to be ‘Hiding Behind the Sofa’; hence the header picture of a terrified bloke who daren’t come out from back there….
5 Check out my essay ‘Thinking In the Box‘ for a previous, true real-life example of this sort of behaviour, although probably nobody died behind the sofa on that particular occasion. But hey, who knows… šŸ˜‰
6 If you don’t think so, well I’m sorry but I myself will sleep just fine tonight šŸ˜‰
7 This is partly to protect my mind from the quite frankly offensive sheer ignorance and rudeness displayed by their ignoring my messages – which is at the same time both disgraceful and disgusting. I really don’t understand how ministers of the Gospel could be so rude as to not reply to a perfectly inoffensive question.
8 Well, nearly so; I mean obviously things like child sexual abuse and stuff is a lot worse. But ignoring the messages is in itself a form of abuse, and that’s before I’ve even darkened their doors with my presence!
9 I sometimes think that this is why so many churches just stick to reading and discussing familiar Bible passages, because of the warm and comfortable, familiar feeling it gives them. Which is fine, if that’s what they want, but for me nothing short of the fizzing, solid presence of God will do!
10 They don’t know me, so by any definition I’m a stranger.
11 Interesting how he, quite independently, uses the Litmus Test terminology that I too have adopted! I used it because I am a retired professional pharmaceutical scientist, so it meant something to me at least!
12 I apologise for calling you Shirley, unless of course that is actually your name šŸ˜‰ Yes, that’s from the classic movie ‘Airplane’ (1980), “Surely you can’t be serious?” “I am serious. And don’t call me Shirley” 🤣
13 I mean here that you don’t want to ignore any important verses that you consider pivotal in forming your doctrines and policies. In practice, however, for most churches this usually turns out to be not so much the ‘whole counsel’ meaning the entire sweep of Scripture, as they claim they mean, but just the verses they have chosen to not ignore. People who claim that they proclaim ‘the whole counsel of God’ never actually do so.
14 All you need to do is to look at the same passage in a number of different English translations of the Bible (I have twelve of these, including a Hebrew and Greek Interlinear, and a Greek-only New Testament Interlinear with a different Greek text; am I a sad man or what!) to see that the wording of the translations (even in the Greek) is slightly different. How then can someone hope to form a cast-iron doctrine on what is essentially a paraphrase of the original-language text, both in wording and possibly even in meaning?
15 This is a standardĀ  doctrine in some (but not all) branches of Evangelicalism, probably based on Romans 6:23: “For the wages of sin is death”, and the nature of the sin required to qualify for that death is not specified simply because all sin pays the same wages: death!
16 And knowing what Evangenitals are like (Evangenitals being Christians with an unhealthy interest in what others do with their private parts! 🤣 ), they are probably sexual ‘sins’.
17 A standard argument to prevent gentle Christians from affirming (well, openly, at any rate!) LGBTQ+ people and their relationships.
18 I have to be fair and say that this is a human trait, not just a Christian one. There are those for whom it appears that their entire purpose in life is simply to judge others. I wouldn’t want to live like that!
19 For the purposes of this thought experiment, let’s say that ‘god hates gays’ is that particular church’s attitude towards gay people; not all of them are like that, but this hypothetical church is!
20 And it will be all of them; the entire church will know within a matter of minutes. Church gossip is one of the most lethal and unstoppable forces in the Universe!
21 And they’ll justify that by claiming that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. That’s not quite what that verse means….

Is it a Sin to be Weird?

A Classic Illustration of Sin Obsession.
And its cure.

This was a post in a social media group for autistic Christians. Most of the Christians whose posts I read in that group are Evangelicals, and the discussion is very often about ‘sin’. What is a sin, what is not a sin, what is forgiven, when is it not forgiven, what about the ‘unforgivable sin’, all that sort of thing.

In some ways, this is a typical absolutist autistic comment in a faith already recognised for its black-and-white thinking and attitudes, and which is probably not helped by the group being autistic people; one common trait among autistic people is that of black-and-white thinking, which doevetails nicely with culty Evangelical thinking. But still the principle holds: sin-obsession, even to the point of being worried that an aspect of one’s personality is in and of itself a ‘sin’, sin-obsession itself is a very real problem and is a major trip hazard for neurodivergent and neurotypical people alike when it comes to their faith walk. And so, even neurotypicals among my readership may gain some benefit from considering this question with me today.

Nevertheless, the post was genuine, and reflected to me the heart cry of a person who is struggling with ‘sin’ and also struggling with his uniqueness in his autism. As autistic, neurodivergent people, we are different – different from non-autistic (neurotypical (NT) people) – but we are also different from each other. No two autistic people have the same wiring in their brains, despite them both being autistic. To be autistic is, in many ways, to be alone with your uniqueness. Personally, I actually like being like that, but many autistic people struggle with it. And I get that. But, in short, we are all weird; each of us uniquely so.

Of course, there are no Bible verses about ‘weirdness’, nor about it being a ‘sin’. In fact, the Bible is actually strangely non-specific about ‘sin’ in its pages; rarely is a particular action or behaviour identified as ‘sinful’, and in fact the whole concept of ‘sin’ is not clearly explained at all.

But anyway, I saw here an opportunity to encourage the original poster (the ‘OP’), as did others in the group. All of the answers that expressed an opinion said that ‘No’, it is not a ‘sin’ to be weird. I especially liked a comment where the person said,

No Bible verse, but I’m coming here to say that “weird” is needed to be a space for other “weird” people to be welcoming and connected to as they embrace one another as brothers and sisters in Christ. We are a spectrum of humanity, and I think God loves that! And when Jesus came here, he was beyond “weird” in terms of not conforming to what was expected of Him at the time. It got Him crucified. So weird in itself, no not a sin as long as your weird isn’t to sin”.

And so that person kind of turned it around, from it being a sin to be weird, to saying that the only sin would be if your weirdness made you sin. Or something like that. And also, more importantly, gave it a positive feel by giving it a context of humanity. Very nicely done!

But, naturally, I, with of course my own brand of autism, noted that the emphasis in people’s comments was, while rightly being on the question itself, was also quite heavily on ‘sin’ too[1], which, as we know, is pretty typical for sin-obsessed Christians. And so I thought I’d put in my two penn’orth, with an emphasis on freedom from the worry of sin and the benefit of that mindset. Unlike my normal practice, I also gave quite a few Scripture references[2]. This was because a) the OP asked for Bible verses; and b) I was fully aware that my audience would comprise many people who would need Scripture verses for every. damn. thing. else they wouldn’t listen. Plus, the teaching I gave was the sort of thing that is hard for many Christians to accept (e.g. Jn 6:60; 2Pet 3:16), and so, the more I could back it up with Scripture, the more they’d benefit from it. I also phrased it to make it clear that although I have some solid ideas, I too am on a learning journey. At least, I hope that’s how it came across, anyway. Here’s what I wrote:

Is it a Sin to be Weird?Ā 

No. It’s not. And there doesn’t need to be a Bible verse for that!

However, let me give you, as a Bible verse, a possible interpretation of Hebrews 12:1, ‘Let us throw off the sin that so easily entangles…’.

I now interpret that to mean that it’s not the sin itself that entangles, like addiction or compulsive behaviour or similar. That is part of it, yes. But my current understanding of that passage – which understanding may not be for everyone, I appreciate – is that it is the obsession with sin itself that is the entanglement. (There is actually a modern translation – the Mirror Translation – that translates it like this: ā€œAs with an athlete who is determined to win, it would be silly to carry any baggage of the old law-system that would weigh one down. Make sure you do not get your feet clogged up with sin-consciousness.ā€)[3] And by this, I mean that if we are sin-conscious all the time, then there is no room in our hearts for the ‘focus your thoughts on things above’ (Col 3:2), nor for the ‘Whatever is true, noble…think on these things’ (Phil 4:8).

Focusing on these higher things, especially according to the Colossians verse (Col 3:2) is our privilege and indeed our right, resulting as it does from our position as people raised up in Christ and seated with Him in heavenly places. Being sin-conscious – being constantly fretting about whether we are sinning or not in any particular situation – is one of the main things that cripples Christians from walking in the Spirit; such people are so sin-conscious that there is no room for them to be Christ-conscious. The verse ‘consider yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus’ (Rom 6:11) is referring to exactly that. We were made to walk free in the forgiveness of the Cross: all sin, past, present and future is forgiven. That’s what ‘It is finished!’ (John 19:30) means, and it’s also what ‘I will remember their sin no more’ (Heb 8:12) means too.

So the question is not so much, ‘Is [insert action of choice] a sin?’, but more ‘Where are we going together today, Jesus?’. One is a set of rules. The other is a way of life. I know which way I’d rather go.

Actually, on further consideration, there actually are a couple of Bible verses for you, on the back of what I wrote above. The first is the classic Romans 8:1, that “…there is now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus”. If you are in Christ Jesus – and remember that it is God Who has placed you in Christ (2Cor 1:21), not you, so that’s a relief! – then there is no condemnation for you. So whether ‘being weird’ is a sin or not, that’s not the point any more; the point is that no matter what, if you are in Christ then there’s no condemnation. The second verse is in Romans 14:17, that the Kingdom of God is not about food or drink, but about righteousness, peace and joy in the Spirit.

Again, as I said above, being part of the Kingdom is not about following rules – “do not handle! do not taste! Do not touch!” (Col 2:21) but about what we already have in Christ. All that a sin preoccupation does is to distract from, and dilute, who we are in Christ!

Do you see the contrast? Rules about unclean food and things are the old wineskin; freedom in Christ is about realising the righteousness we already have in Christ, the peace that He gives, and the joy of the Holy Spirit. It’s life in a different dimension; rather than living to please the Law and follow its rules, we leave all that behind and just live for Him. And that’s why the old wineskin will burst; it cannot contain a freedom as huge as that!

People sometimes ask me (usually in an accusatory tone!), ‘So then, do you still sin?’ And my answer is invariably, ‘I don’t know! It’s been a while since I looked!’ I’m too caught up with following Jesus to worry about that. That’s why He set me free from it, so I could follow Him without having to worry about things like that. That’s what ā€˜freedom from sin’ actually means. If God has forgotten my sins (Jer 31:34, Heb 8:12), then why should I dredge them back up again?

And by walking in the Spirit, not thinking about sin or being concerned by it, that means that I do not fulfill the desires of the flesh (Gal 5:16). Walking in the freedom of the children of God (Rom 8:21) means that sin is no longer a problem because I am dead to it; conversely, I am however alive to God in Christ Jesus (Rom 6:11), hallelujah! It is Grace that teaches us to say no to ungodly desires (Titus 2:11-12) and by walking in that Grace which includes the free gift of God’s perpetual forgiveness (Jude 24), sin is no longer our natural way of life. A new heart He has given us! (Ez 36:26; 2Cor 5:17)


Well, that’s what I said. So far, no-one has reacted in any way to the post, but as usual I am not discouraged by this! The people who needed to see it; those who needed to hear its message, will have done so and will have been blessed. In fact, I would estimate that some people are afraid to react positively in public to that sort of teaching, because it’s not exactly mainstream with regards to the belief structures of the group as a whole. And that’s ok. It is nevertheless a viewpoint that is fuly supported by Scripture, and, for those who have the ears to hear, it will be a source of great blessing.

And, of course, there’s you, my readers, seeing this here today. Only when I stand before Him will I know how many people have been helped by what I shared with the autistic brother that day, and by my re-sharing it on here.

Grace and Peace to you all!


I haven’t included this article in the series, ‘The Problems of Evangelicalism‘, because ‘sin-fixation’ isn’t a problem which is confined only to that branch of Christianity. It features heavily in it, of course, but it’s pretty widespread in the faith as a whole. So I thought I’d leave it more open than just saying this is an Evangelical quirk; it’s not.

Footnotes

Footnotes
1 Yes, I do realise that ‘sin’ was part of the question and therefore valid for comment!
2 Hopefully, that wasn’t proof-texting, because I wasn’t trying to prove things, just to support. Proof texting is where someone rips a verse out of context in order to force a point of view; this was much more gentle than that. But I’ll let you be the judge!
3 Hence my use of an athlete sprinting, as my header picture!

The Destroyer of Faith

A long Essay on Spiritual Abuse and Religious Trauma

TRIGGER WARNING:

This is a personal story involving religious abuse, and contains descriptions of religious abuse, religious trauma, and the techniques used by religious abusers. It may even come across as a bit of a rant, but I think it needs to be said in any case. It’s not for the faint-hearted. You have been warned! šŸ˜€


There are certain Christians who abuse other Christians in various ways. These people can so easily wreck and sometimes even destroy others’ faith by their words, by the damage those words cause, by their actions, and by their example.

I quote Oppenheimer above in order to emphasise that this kind of behaviour brings death. It is spiritual abuse, which brings spiritual trauma and kills a person’s spirit within them. Spiritual death[1]. And so, these kinds of Religious people are guilty of bringing that spiritual death to other people – sometimes unwittingly, sometimes as a fit of pique, and sometimes deliberately and maliciously. Sadly, I have seen all three šŸ™ Indeed, I would even go so far as to say that they reflect the character of ‘someone’ who is not Father God… indeed, they reflect more the character of the Accuser, who cometh not but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy (Jn 10:10 (KJV))- steal your assurance, kill your joy, and destroy your peace.

But, as always, by their fruits you will know them (Mt 7:16). If their words and actions cause suffering and the ‘steal, kill and destroy’ antics expressed above, you can be sure that that spirit is not from God. And while I realise that faith is a gift from God (Eph 2:8-9), the phenomenon I am describing in this piece is where someone’s God-given faith is so badly desecrated, mauled and smashed by religious abuse – often from a person that the victim should have been able to trust, which is partially why it’s ‘abuse’ – that the person finds it is no longer possible to practise, express, exercise or enact their faith due to the damage that has been done to it. It is rendered lifeless by the abuse endured, partially because the abused person no longer feels safe to express that faith, at least not in the context they live, whether religious or social – or both. That’s why I refer to spiritual abuse as being ‘The Destroyer of Faith’.

In many of my posts, I have railed against Religious people[2] who seem to think it’s their job to police other people’s moral life. Many groups also have people amongst their number who feel free to assume that everyone is subject to their criticism and has to not only listen, but also agree and do something about any points raised, whether or not it’s someone they know and whether or not they have their permission. Certainly, if there is no actual relationship there, then they shouldn’t be doing that.

As a case in point, as my dear friend Derrick Day once said, “If you have a problem with me, call me. If you don’t have my number, then you don’t know me well enough to have a problem with me!”.

Now, granted, you may well offend or injure a complete stranger, in public or in private, and they would be well within their rights to complain to you. ‘Oi! You just trod on my foot!’ or something. And you would hopefully apologise, and that would (again, hopefully) be the end of it. But it’s superficial; there is nothing deep about it, nor is any other action required other than to apologise and maybe pay their medical bills if you injured them. There was no intentionality in it, either malicious or benign; it’s just neutral. I don’t need to expand on this; all of my readers will be familiar with this sort of thing.

However, there are some people, usually Religious people (and some political activists) who demand more. In short, they want blood. They want to know why you did something, what your motivations are, whether or not you are sufficiently contrite (sufficiently, that is, to their satisfaction) and most of all how you are going to make significant lifestyle changes to prevent further occurrences of your wrongdoing. Okay, maybe I’m being a bit hyperbolic, but anyone who has ever received a bollocking from a self-righteous Religious type will know exactly what I’m on about. The bottom line here is that any response to such a complaint is entirely your business, and no-one else’s.

Ten years ago, something like that happened to me. In fact, I wrote some of my first posts on this blog in response to that episode. One such example is the beautiful February 2015 article ‘Confrontation‘, which lays out the sort of approach that a believer, at least, would be advised and indeed expected to adopt, when confronting someone with something that has offended them. Certainly, it must be done in a spirit of restoration and reconciliation, not one of condemnation. No Christian should ever do anything that would cause someone to doubt that God loves them, by whatever means, but especially by lading guilt and condemnation, which can take literally years to throw off, and in some cases the person never recovers[3]. Three articles that may help when it comes to people correcting/judging are here (the ‘Confrontation’ piece referenced above), here and here.

Unfortunately, certain Christians seem to excel at that kind of condemnation, especially when it is inflicted on fellow believers. Maybe that works so well because they know that Christians are especially vulnerable to conscience problems, particularly those who are ‘sin-conscious’ and/or ‘sin-fixated’. Such condemnatory people cause tremendous damage and hurt[4]. While for Jesus it’s true that ‘a bruised reed He will not break; a smoking wick He will not snuff out’ (Isaiah 42:3), many of His followers do not have that same gentleness. As a friend of mine said on Facebook the other day, “Christians are the only ones who go out of their way to make sure that hurting people know they aren’t loved by God”.

Aye, I had to admit to him that, sadly, I’ve seen that first hand. In my case it didn’t work, because I know the truth about myself and about how God sees me, but they did try their best. Ten years ago now, it was.

So, here’s the story, with a bit of background too:

In August, 1999, I began my ‘dark night of the soul‘, where I stopped doing Christian things entirely. The short version of this is that I was being stripped of all the junk that had been hindering my faith for so long; religious requirements that had layered over my simple faith, and other things too. And it lasted for fifteen years. On on Sunday 2nd Feb, 2014, God said to me, ‘Ok lad, it’s time to go back’, so I duly went along with Fiona – and I got thoroughly zapped. Here’s what I posted on Facebook that afternoon: “What a morning. First time voluntarily in a church for fifteen years, and getting thoroughly zapped by God: weeping, laughing, complete acceptance, forgiveness. Wow, wow, wow! Going again tonight hehe”. That divine encounter was simply profound. I had never felt anything like that before, and I later said that I likened it to ‘being born again, again’! Since then, I have known that I would never, ever want to go back to the legalistic, religion-centred faith that I had previously had; it was like becoming a butterfly, having emerged from my fifteen-year chrysalis. My chains had indeed fallen off, and my heart was free!

To continue with the butterfly analogy, the problem with being a butterfly is that, while the butterfly can still speak caterpillar, the caterpillar cannot speak butterfly. It’s like you have a different language. The word ‘Grace’ now actually means something, rather than just something you say at the end of each meeting while holding hands and trying to avoid each other’s eyes, or a short prayer at a meal. Forgiveness is real, ongoing and at the same time permanent. You know that God ‘remember[s] your sin no more’ (Heb 8:12, which quotes Jer 31:34). You know that nothing can snatch you from His hand, nor can you jump! šŸ˜‰ So that by the time of the story I will tell below, my faith was real, vibrant and living, and my assurance complete, my sonship sure and my attitude to ‘sin’ was one of complete freedom to just leave it behind. My joy, despite Fiona’s illness and prognosis, was full and real; indeed, nothing but real joy would have survived the terrible agonies we were going through as a family due to the illness. And my whole frame of reference had shifted, from one of partial reliance on complying with Law, to one wholly, solely and completely dependent on Grace. That’s why I now speak ‘butterfly’!

In December, 2014, in the face of Fiona’s terminal cancer diagnosis, we renewed our marriage vows in a beautiful service in our local Anglican Church, where we were members at the time[5]. The wedding was awesome and many friends old and new came along to bless us, including even some from our former life in West Yorkshire. You know how with some people you have a ‘life bond’; a friendship where even if you haven’t seen each other for like 20 years or more, somehow you just pick up where you left off and things are just as they were before. Well, friends like that.

One of those friends, Sally[6], told us that she was organising a worship conference in February 2015, where Christians from all over the country could get together to learn more about worship. And she invited us to go. The conference was to be a residential one at a Christian centre somewhere well up-country, quite a way from our home in South Devon. But we decided we wanted to go, so we could get a handle on the latest knowledge about practical Charismatic/Evangelical style worship. So off we went, and me just a year into my new life walking in butterfly freedom šŸ˜‰ There was me, Fiona, our daughter Ellie, and my best friend at the time, a very practical and down-to-Earth man called Edd; we considered ourselves to be each other’s ‘wingmen’. We attended (what they referred to as) seminars, and took part in a sort of ‘open mic’ evening; we joined in and generally enjoyed it. We didn’t really learn an awful lot, to be honest[7], and the food was pretty dire[8]. We learned, a lot of, quite frankly, not very useful words denoting different aspects of (I think I recall correctly) worship practices of the ancient Israelites, and similar stuff, but to be honest it was pretty pithy and not much of it was of use. On the plus side, we met some amazing people and made some wonderful new friends, with whom we are still in touch nowadays, and we still continue to bless each other. While in some of the seminars, I heard things I didn’t really agree with, I generally went along with it because I know that not everyone believes the same thing, even at an Evangelical retreat. But there was one point – it was so insignificant that I can’t even remember what it was! – where I put up my hand and asked a question. The speaker, a lady whom we’ll call ‘Joanna’, was a bit nonplussed by it, she tried to answer it, and later I spoke to her privately, to make sure that she knew there was nothing personal involved; it was a genuine question. Little did I know that I had become a marked man! Obviously, for Joanna and her fellow speakers, the word ‘conference’ was nothing of the sort; it didn’t involve any two-way at all; we were expected to just sit there and listen. I am a trained Adult Education Tutor (I used to teach basic computing in evening classes at a local college) and I know that people have different learning styles; evidently Joanna didn’t know that. Probably not a teacher, or probably so full of herself that… well I need say no more! But the next day, I raised my hand to ask another question, and the speaker (not Joanna), even though she saw my hand up, quickly averted her eyes and ignored me. It seemed to me that she’d been briefed to watch out for that guy with the Yorkshire accent, because therein lies trouble! šŸ˜‰ And then, in a later seminar, it was Joanna’s turn to speak again and she said that (and I quote) ‘God can’t do anything without faith as a prerequisite’. Well, that was something I couldn’t really accept, and although I didn’t put my hand up (because I knew I would be ignored), I did put a small post on Facebook that evening:

“I’ve just heard the phrase, ‘God Can’t’. And that at a worship conference, no less. Well, I’m here to say God Can!”

That was it. That was all I put[9].

The next morning, I ran Edd to the local railway station early on, because he had to get back to Devon for some football coaching he was doing that day. I returned in time for breakfast – rubbery sausages, some sort of hard-fried egg with a pale yolk (we have free-range chickens, so we are somewhat spoiled!), Sainsburys Savers beans and the Tesco in-house version of Coco Pops. As I was eating my final bowl of (air quotes) “coco pops”, Sally and Joanna approached the table with facial expressions like those disapproving expressions that used to be worn by Cissie and Ada in the Les Dawson Show. The photo here, of Cissie and Ada[10], does not do Joanna and Sally’s faces justice because they both had tight lips like they’d been sucking lemons, and their heads both held in an identical tilt to the left šŸ˜‚.

Well, they must have indeed been disapproving expressions, because despite being Autistic and generally unable to read any sort of body language, even I noticed, and Ellie called out ‘This looks like an intervention!’ Displaying no humour whatsoever at Ellie’s brilliant comment, as is usual for the Religious when they are ‘on a mission’, they agreed that it was an ‘intervention’. They wanted to take me to task about my Facebook comment of the previous evening. Well, for me, breakfast is a sacred time, for eating not arguing, so I told them I hadn’t finished my breakfast and I was going to do so first. So they sat and watched (something I can’t stand, being Autistic) while I finished off every last orangey-brown drop of cheapo-chocolate flavoured milk from the “coco pops”. Remember this was at a fully-occupied breakfast table with about another four people there in addition to myself and my family – of course, Edd was on a train back to Devon so I didn’t have my wingman there to watch my ‘six’. Anyway, before they started in on me, I made it clear that I am my own man and that I do not recognise any authority over me, including theirs, and they agreed with that on the surface, probably just to get their own way. But in the presence of all these people, in full violation of any Biblical principle about confronting people (Mt 18:15-20) – they made up their own rules as they went along – they proceeded to lambast me verbally about my post, concluding that it was ‘all over the World Wide Web'[11], this being concluded by Joanna’s contemptuous chucking of Sally’s phone (which she had been brandishing) on to the table. Accompanied not only by the obligatory sniff, but also by a demand that I take down the comment. Sally had shown Joanna on her phone what she’d seen on my Facebook feed, and Joanna had gone straight on the warpath. They’d clearly jumped straight to their own conclusions and given it no thought before coming to administer me a bollocking! In addition, she also told me that I had done ‘nothing but contradict her since [I’d] been there’, which is a bit of an exaggeration as I’d only asked one question, and made sure afterwards that we were ‘all good’. Hardly the actions of a disruptive person. And this all being done to a chap who has had only a year to come to to terms with having his faith restored in quite a surprising way, in the presence of my daughter who was just beginning to flourish as a young Christian girl, and my lovely Fiona who had a terminal cancer diagnosis. All these factors; those two women knew about them all. How callous is that? How selfish? I refused to take the comment down, mainly out of principle, because I detest the suppression of free speech just because someone doesn’t like what is written. Fiona was stricken and explained that I have Asperger’s Syndrome, and that most likely I would eventually see their point of view and take the comment down. But they were having none of it. Joanna even said, literally through gritted teeth, that if I was Autistic then they could pray for me![12] I mean, I would probably have got turned into a toad or something! Honestly, words cannot express the depths of the disgust that this episode engendered in me. Needless to say, we returned home that day, missing out on the rest of that last day of the conference – not that we’d have learned much, I’m convinced. Just as the first seminar was being set up – Sally was going to be teaching on that one, so I am sort of sorry I missed it – Fiona went in to see her and to give her a hug; she must have known that this was the last time they would ever see each other and Fiona wasn’t the sort of person who would leave something like that up in the air. But we left. My peace damaged, my mind in a turmoil, my ladies gutted on my behalf. But once the dust had settled, I learned a lot from it as I will describe below. To be honest, I don’t think, now, that Sally intended for Joanna to go off on one like that; I think she was just hurt and shared it with Joanna to share her burden. And Joanna decided to take her already – existing dislike for me (for being trouble enough to listen carefully to what she was teaching and actually ask a question!) into a public shaming event. Shame it tarnished her own reputation more; those around the table got to see just how toxic she was. The old phrase ‘that says a lot more about them than it does about you’ was particularly apropos there! Anyway, I did actually take the post down, within a day in fact, because my attitude was that if it was hurting someone, then it shouldn’t be there, and I messaged Joanna to let her know, at which point she promptly blocked me with no reply. Petty and ungrateful, much. A relevant point here is that while a person may well feel free to take someone to task about something they don’t like, the response to the criticism is always in the hands of the one being criticised. Someone may well feel free to criticise my actions, but they don’t get to dictate my actions. This is a principle that all members of medium- to high-control groups could do with knowing.

But back to the story. It might not seem like much, but for an Autistic person to be publicly humiliated like that – indeed for anyone to have that happen to them! – it’s pretty bad. For someone who is an innocent, clean, joy-filled and free Christian believer acting in good faith – it wasn’t even a bad comment! – to be attacked like that. For a new believer to have to see something that ugly. For a dying lady to have to see the husband she adores being treated like that. That – is disgraceful. And sadly it’s not untypical of religious people to do things like that.

The next few paragraphs may seem a bit random or confused; a bit ‘all over the place’, but please see it as a mosaic of different impressions and realisations, also some expressions of reality, from the fall-out from that event. I have left them like this in order to simulate, in some small measure, the disjointed thinking and shock and damage effect of what it’s like when something like this happens.

I didn’t actually hold anything against the women in the story, and I still don’t. I forgave them, as you can see from the article I wrote only a few days later. I have not published the details of what happened until now; I have certainly not named-and-shamed. I have thought in depth about when – or even whether – to publish this article, or even to write it. Indeed, I am writing it only a few days before it will be published. I have waited on this for ten years. So, it is obvious that it is not coming from a place of either unforgiveness nor bitterness. I am still good friends with Sally[13]. I’m not saying that Joanna is the Destroyer of Faith, nor am I saying that she is a Destroyer of Faith. What I am saying, though, is that her actions are an example of the sort of behaviour thatĀ is the Destroyer of Faith.

I wanted to publish the story because I know that this is not an isolated incident. It may well be for Joanna, of course (although I doubt it; usually people who do this kind of thing already have a habit of it), but still, people need to know that this sort of thing goes on in churches, especially those where the ‘authority’ of leadership – even if they are ‘only’ conference speakers – is held as a licence to abuse people. Joanna’s husband is in the leadership team of Sally and Joanna’s church, so she’s probably seen as some sort of ‘untouchable’. The Evangelical idea of ‘do not touch the Lord’s anointed’ is rife in churches like theirs – although their pastor is one of the kindest, gentlest men I have ever met (he’s not Joanna’s husband). I wonder if he knows that stuff like this goes on among his flock?

I understand that my post was received as hurtful, for which I apologised at the time, and I almost – but not quite – understand why. It was their ‘baby’; they had put a lot of work into the conference (although sadly the other organisers hadn’t put much money into the food budget 🤣 ) and they were offended by my post. That said, my post was more of a general comment anyway, it was not targeted against anyone (I don’t do things like that) and it was posted in all innocence.Ā  It wasn’t even about the conference; it was about something that someone said. And if it was that hurtful, why did Sally have to share the hurt even further, except to cause trouble? Why didn’t she come to me, one-on-one? No-one could tell from the post where I was, nor whose worship conference I was at. Part of being Autistic is that it is very difficult, if not impossible, for the Autistic person to see things from others’ points of view, especially when it’s all so convoluted, inferred and second-guessed. This is partly why I stay away from people in general, and occurrences like this only serve to reinforce that attitude as being the correct one in my case.

Leading on from the thing about the conference being their ‘baby’, yes – I get that. But I think that linking my comment about faith with the quality (or otherwise) of the conference was really taking themselves a bit too too seriously. This is a classic example of offence being taken rather than given, as I have shared in other posts. When someone is told that offence was not intended, but they still insist on receiving that offence, then that’s a sure sign that the problem is with them, not with the comment or its creator.

As an illustration of how this incident improved the way I approach life, I wrote, in this article, the following, very observant, comment, which references the events in this story:

“Interestingly, about a year ago I was once again subjected to an (uninvited) barrage of accusations/doctrinal correction/call it what you will, from a ā€˜non-free Christian’, and it made me realise, while in the process of categorically rejecting that person’s diatribe, just how far I have come in my freedom. I never want to go back to that life. My ā€˜detoxification’[14], as it were, has released me into entirely new freedoms to love people of different views without judging them or trying to change them. And that, to me, is real freedom!”

And now a thought about how some Christians seem to think that they hold some sort of power over others. These Christians could be either leadership, their relatives (‘Elders’ wives’, as it were) or others who feel they have something to say and that they are too important to leave it unsaid. Remember that I stated clearly (after I’d eaten my “coco pops”!) that I did not consider myself ‘under’ Joanna’s authority in any way, which, of course, she then proceeded to ignore. At least from her side, anyway; it didn’t affect the way in which I received the criticism. I still rejected it, and her authority along with it.

Anyway, these kinds of abusive people mis-use the faith position of the victim in order to facilitate their attack. In other words, they know that a fellow believer is likely to have sufficient conscience and gentle heart to listen to criticism, whether that’s in the interest of maintaining harmonious relationships, wanting to ‘keep short accounts with God'[15]or any other good and noble reason[16], and this makes the victim open and pliable for what comes next. Their defences are down; why would they want to raise their defences against a fellow member of the Church family? Until it hits them, of course, but by that time the damage is done.

High-control church leadership invariably go on about people making themselves ‘vulnerable’, citing it as being a ‘softening of the heart’ so that Jesus can change it. There was even a Graham Kendrick song some decades ago, called ‘soften my heart’ which espoused that principle. While the sentiments behind a favourable response to this softening idea is seen as admirable, and indeed it can help some people to become more compassionate, it has two problems. Firstly, such a softening should and must only occur under the prompting and direction of the Holy Spirit, and not from a human, whether or not it’s set to music šŸ˜‰ And it’s usually an unconscious thing; I find that all of a sudden I have reacted to a need in a way I wouldn’t have done before, and I never noticed that my attitudes had changed. That’s how the Spirit works. Secondly, it opens up the believer to abuse; specifically, abuse aimed at the vulnerability of that softened heart. Abusive leaders take full advantage of that, and this was what happened in Joanna’s case with me. And that’s partially why it hurt so much. Although in my case, the main thing was what it did to Fiona; the poor girl was devastated. As was Ellie. ‘Dad, you’ve come so far, and she goes and does that to you’. And she was right. I would also add that these abusive leaders don’t necessarily consciously realise that it’s the ‘softened heart’ they are targeting; they just know that it works. Or at least it does with people who submit to them, at any rate. I cope with the ‘softened heart’ concept in my own way. My heart is indeed soft; I have deep compassion for, well, everyone, including all life, really – animals, plants and so on. But I also have an armoured box, which granted does remain open most of the time, but it stands always ready to snap shut on the approach of nasty people. That’s how I defend; your method may vary.

And it really is time for these destructive people to learn how to respect boundaries. Even for those visiting ‘evangelists’ on my doorstep a couple of weeks ago; they had crossed a boundary. They had knocked on my door despite the clear presence of signs on the door (and right next to the doorbell, too!) that said ‘No Cold Callers’. I wrote to the church a few days later (of course, I am still awaiting a response at the time of writing!)[17] and said this:

“No-one is going to change their mind about not wanting to be disturbed just because it’s religious people doing the disturbing, nor are they likely to want to attend your church if this is how badly people’s boundaries are respected”.

The question of boundaries is indeed an important one. For example, and at the risk of seeming to behave like them!, only in a church will someone ask you a question about sexual matters. They love it. They will even feel free to ask a couple if they are sleeping together! In our pre-marriage ‘counselling’ sessions, Fiona and I were asked straight up if we had ‘misbehaved’ together. I kid you not. No doubt the Elders got some sort of cheap thrills out of it; Fiona was always absolutely drop-dead gorgeous. But the fact remains that they crossed a boundary in asking us that. Christians do so love to talk about sexual matters, all in ‘love’ of course, and ‘strictly as a matter of spiritual healthiness’. I do think it gives them a cheap little frisson of forbidden sexual thrill. But in what world is it ever acceptable to ask someone a question like that? And even more, to expect an honest answer, which in some groups could earn you instant punishment as a reward for your openness? No way!

The take-home message for that is this: I can see absolutely no reason at all to ‘open oneself up’ to the potential of abuse by lowering one’s defences and making oneself vulnerable. [18]. I share this recommendation so as to protect you, my gentle reader, from making the same mistake. There is absolutely no need to make yourself vulnerable to anyone outside your family.

Let’s put that another way: Churches are not family, no matter how much they claim to be. Blood is definitely thicker than water. When I left my church in Leeds, only a very few people from that church maintained contact with us; those who really loved us. Mark and Alison (who greatly helped us in our move south, although I won’t say how because it would embarrass them), Richard and Elizabeth, Chris and Dawn. That’s about it. Not the Church Elders; you know, the men who used to conclude their Elders’ Meetings with a Chinese takeaway paid for with church funds, when I and my family were living on the breadline and tithing to the hilt. The Elders who told me that I couldn’t buy the church synthesiser to go to Devon with me, because how would they find someone who would know how to buy another?[19] Please don’t interpet this prose as a complaining diatribe, nor as bitterness. Like I said, I’m well past all that. But maybe see it as a warning that you simply cannot trust church leadership anywhere near as much as they would tell you that you can. As they’d be the first to tell you (after saying ‘Do not touch the Lord’s Anointed!, of course!’), they are only human. But it further reinforces my belief that the only reason why they put up with me in that church was because I was just so damn good at leading worship šŸ˜€ They weren’t bothered about me as a person.

This is encapsulated perfectly in the following quote from the Irish writer-poet, Dylan Morrison:

“Religious and spiritual movements both tend to come and go, with only Divine Presence remaining constant.
“May I respectfully make a suggestion, one born out of personal experience.
“Don’t pour your whole identity into a movement, no matter what the brand.
“Why not?
“Well, it all usually ends up in tears, disillusionment and deep confusion.
Best to open up one’s heart to the One without change, I reckon”.

– Dylan Morrison

Now, that says it all.

Another factor is the Religious spirit. I go into some detail about that in this article, but for now let’s just say that, as I have already mentioned, some Christians take themselves far too seriously, and that is often (though by no means always!) due to the Religious spirit[20] Here are a few quotations where the lightness and levity of being a free believer are contrasted with the load of being under the religious yoke:

ā€œThe Religious of Jesus’ day complained that He was a glutton and a drunkard. Sounds like He was enjoying life pretty much to the full, while at the same time preaching how much God loved people. To me, what they found offensive was that someone could take life so lightly while at the same time taking God so seriously. Religion can’t cope with thatā€. – Me

ā€œā€¦pride [in this case, pride engendered as part of the effects of the Religious spirit – Ed] cannot rise to levity or levitation. Pride is the downward drag of all things into an easy solemnity. One ā€œsettles downā€ into a sort of selfish seriousness; but one has to rise to a gay self-forgetfulness. A man ā€œfallsā€ into a brown study; he reaches up at a blue sky. Seriousness is not a virtue. It would be a heresy, but a much more sensible heresy, to say that seriousness is a vice. It is really a natural trend or lapse into taking one’s self gravely, because it is the easiest thing to do. It is much easier to write a good Times leading article than a good joke in Punch. For solemnity flows out of men naturally; but laughter is a leap. It is easy to be heavy: hard to be light. Satan fell by the force of gravity.ā€ – G. K. Chesterton

ā€œMaybe people should more often than not just [accept what the Bible says] and shake the dust off and leave when their message is not being received? According to the Bible, saying nothing is actually a good thing and shows maturity and wisdom. But alas… They probably won’t, because such is the religious spirit[21]. It always has to be right and always has to get the last word, or it will eat them up inside. Their comments will never seem to be about correcting for love’s sake, but will more than likely seem to be about correcting because nobody is as right as they are.ā€ – Tim

ā€œIn general, I’ve found that people who are very legalistic try very hard to recruit others to their ranks. My opinion is that the more insecure one is in what one believes, the more that person will need the validation of others, which is often gained by getting others to join them and by refusing to even hear any other views. I suspect they’re also jealous of those who’ve found freedom by not having to beat themselves over the head daily with guilt and shame and ā€œlawsā€. Jesus made it clear he didn’t / doesn’t appreciate spiritual enforcers, those who think they’ve got such a grip on righteousness that they are hammers, and everyone who doesn’t agree with them exactly is a nail that needs to be hammered.ā€ – Jack B

And yet, Jesus wants even those with the Religious spirit to loosen up and actually enjoy life with Him. Of course He does. Listen to this:

ā€œAre you tired? Worn out? Burned out on religion? Come to me. Get away with me and you’ll recover your life. I’ll show you how to take a real rest. Walk with me and work with me—watch how I do it. Learn the unforced rhythms of grace. I won’t lay anything heavy or ill-fitting on you. Keep company with me and you’ll learn to live freely and lightly.ā€ – Mt 11:28-30 (Message)

And He meant it, too. For so many Christians, their faith walk is one under the heavy load of religious burdens. My life changed when I shed those burdens and walked free.

ā€œThe enemy of the Truth does his best work through the religious folks. He keeps them sin conscious while convincing them that they are Christ conscious. They are the first to throw stones, point out specks and elevate the Bible to the level of an idol. But thanks be unto God that He will bring them too into a realization of Himself through Christ in due course of time. For now ya just gotta love them. They can’t help their blindness.ā€ – C Andrew May

I sincerely hope that this happens, especially to Joanna. Wouldn’t that be great? šŸ˜€

Another point is that who would want to go to a church, any church, where it is expected that you open yourself up to this sort of thing? It’s actually the main reason why I’m writing this essay – in order to warn people of what can happen if someone overcommits or overexposes themselves in this sort of environment. Ok, so I am putting people off going. I’d rather that than have them come to harm, and in any case the churches have brought it on themselves.

No, if you want to go toĀ  a church, go to a simple, quiet little CofE church or something, sing the hymns, feel the presence of God (after all, that’s the whole point!) and leave after the service, or after coffee if you’re feeling brave. Don’t let them rope you into anything. And don’t feel you have to put anything in the collection plate, if they have one. You don’t have to tell anyone your ‘doctrinal position’ on matters like Hell, salvation or LGBTQ+ issues. If you feel judged at any point, get out and don’t go back. And never, ever ‘hang on in there’ for just a little bit longer hoping that things will improve, because they just won’t. It might also be an idea if you don’t get drawn in to a political discussion! If you have special talents, abilities or Autistic superpowers, don’t tell anyone. If you’re gay, definitely don’t tell anyone. If anyone asks you about anything sexual (and believe it or not, they might!), find the pastor and report them to him/her. And then leave. Yes, if you go alone, people might ask if you’re married. If you go with a member of the ‘opposite sex’ (and yes I’m aware that this is a ‘problematic’ concept nowadays!), keep your relationship status secret. Keep ’em guessing!Ā  If you go with a member of the same sex, don’t entertain any questions about anything to do with your sexuality. And then report them to the pastor. Yes, there are sick Christians who do indeed ask questions on matters like that…how can that ever be considered normal?? But they do. And then they gossip about you.

Despite all this, I would say – and not even grudgingly! – that Christianity in general does produce an awful lot of good stuff. There’s social initiatives, there’s soup kitchens, there’s programmes to help the poor, there’s all the good things that Christianity has done down the ages like initiating national education, abolishing the slave trade, establishing hospitals, and many more things. There’s some really good worship music, that I still find a real blessing (I have a Christ for the Nations playlist playing as I type this, despite them being a highly legalistic organisation[22]) I get all that. And to be fair, I actually think that Christianity does more good than it does harm, for all its faults. But what I’m doing here is to give my readers a general feel for the sorts of nastiness that can befall someone who gets involved in any medium- to high-control, culty, church where certain of its members seem to think it’s ok to interfere in other members’ lives, and to castigate complete strangers just because they feel like it. And I hope I am also helping their potential victims to gain a real and healthy wariness when considering membership of such a group. The thing is, they will inculcate you gradually, so that you don’t notice what they’re doing. One little thing you don’t like here, but don’t call it out, leads to another one there, down the line, where you don’t call that out either and, little by little, they’ve got you. And, sooner or later, I guarantee that someone will be nasty to you; you can absolutely count on it. I think that my shock on being confronted by Joanna was so great because I hadn’t seen it for a long time; she assumed I’d still be susceptible to that kind of thing (because Sally had told her some of my former background, back before I discovered Grace) and she came in with that assumption. And of course it no longer washed with me, whereas maybe it would have done before. Actually, even then, I would likely have kicked back. I was never that badly inculcated. But it made me remember just how bad it is in Evangelical churches for this sort of thing, and reminded me of the freedom I really have by not being part of one. The Anglican church I was part of at the time didn’t have that sort of thing going on (dunno why!) and was only nominally Evangelical anyway (maybe that’s why!)

If you’re already a believer and thinking of joining such a church, or any church for that matter, be sensitive to what God is calling you do do, if anything, and don’t go beyond that. If, during the after-service coffee, someone wants to rope you into something, go and find someone else to talk to. Watch especially for the old lady in the tweed skirt; it’s her job to get complete strangers to bake cakes for after next week’s service 🤣 I kid you not; the first time we went into our ‘new’ Evangelical church in August 1995, there she was, and that was what she did!

Someone wrote a comment to me recently, saying, “Ain’t no hate like Christian love!”, and in a sense, he’s right. While I have a dear friend in Northern Ireland who is currently experiencing the real love of God expressed through a church congregation, it is a sad fact that such congregations are few and far between. Much more common are groups where the love of Christ has gone cold, and all that is left is the cold, shrivelled neutron star (what’s left of a powerful supergiant star, once its fuel runs out) of a church cinder that has had its day, it’s just going on to try and recapture memories of its past glories, and it’s about time it closed. It’s interesting that folks in such remnant congregations generally have only sin-policing and dislike of ‘worldly’ systems as their common/uniting factors, rather than uniting in love and letting that love leak out into their community. In a sense, they are closed systems with no new life. Maybe that’s why their fuel has run out.

For further help, let me say that there are many books out there on recovering from spiritual and religious abuse, some better than others. Search for them on Amazon or wherever, and read the reviews too. Some of the reviewers of a given book may say that although they found the book helpful, there were bits they didn’t like. As always, with anything like this, when you read a book, feel free to eat the meat and spit out the bones. Keep what is useful; discard what is not.

While this attack and the whole incident did shock me, and it rattled me, and gave me what we used to call ‘a bit of a clattering’, it did not kill my faith. Fortunately for me, my roots in Jesus are so deep that this did not damage my faith in the slightest; in fact it made it even stronger because it is in adversity that our faith is tested – not tested by God, Who doesn’t need to test it (He knows all about it already), but tested by the circumstances so that we can see for real how our faith stands in adverse circumstances. However, I did find that the unjust and irrational nature of the attack did offend my Autistic sense of justice; injustice really rankles with me, and I have tremendous difficulty coping with irrationality, particularly from humans. But my faith is based on actual, historical events that happened in my own life which have given me foundational security in my faith. Two of those events (there are more) are given here and here; I even have the dates and times for them, they had such a profound effect. Furthermore, because I am a ‘butterfly'(see above!), the best (or I suppose you could say ‘worst’) efforts of the caterpillars do not reach me on a faith level anymore, because I live my faith at a level they cannot even imagine. I don’t want that to sound boastful – although in some ways I’m not bothered if it does! – but this is the truth. My faith now works at a level that is so far beyond what it was like before my ‘rebirth’, that it bears little resemblance to it. In a way, my former faith was in two dimensions; my new life is in three dimensions. It is as different from my former life as a cube is to a square – the same basic shape, but with real substance. Or, in keeping with the theme of my blog, it’s like being able to fly, and work in three dimensions, as opposed to the two dimensions to which a mere ground-dweller is restricted. Such is the effect of Grace on a believer’s life. I would moderate that with the following two caveats, though:

ā€œOnce you say ā€˜higher level’ (regarding one’s level of spirituality), you appeal to the ego, and all the wrong instincts in people.ā€

-Fr. Richard Rohr

ā€œWhen you begin to refer to where you’re at on your journey as a ā€œdeeper place,ā€ ā€œhigher level,ā€ ā€œanother dimension,ā€ or some other such thing, you create a space where pride, arrogance, and superiority can thrive in the name of spirituality. No, we’re journeying, and on this journey, mountains are laid low, and valleys exalted. Every place is an equal place for the sincere, it’s just that we are never all in the same place at the same time, and tend to assume wherever we’re at is the place to be.

ā€œThe place to be is wherever you areā€.

-Jeff Turner

I still fully agree with those two quotes. But how else can I express it, that which has become a reality to me? Except just to say that I am aware of no pride or superiority in my thinking; it’s just the way things are. I am stating facts, not putting myself on a pedestal. I suppose that at the end of the day, I am just expressing why the comments of the ‘caterpillars’ do not affect the life of the ‘butterfly’, and why they did not in this case (and they certainly can’t make me into a caterpillar again!) It’s that they don’t understand; indeed they cannot understand. Until you have seen Grace, you can’t understand it. But once you have seen it, you can see nothing else, it is that life-changing.

For those whose faith does get badly damaged, though, there is still good that can come of it. As you will have seen when reading this essay (assuming you haven’t fallen asleep, that is), you can learn so much, just as I have done. And setbacks in your faith walk can be made into strengths as you discard old beliefs and ‘faith positions’, and learn modified ones. This is a part of the ‘Stages of Faith‘, which few Christians know about, but which is what growth in Christ actually looks like. Take a look at my series on spiritual growth; while Christians do tell their congregants that growing into Christ is important, and indeed is one of the objectives of the Christian faith, most of them do not know what this actually looks like, much less do they teach it in any detail. And even by reading this piece, you have put your experiences into a wider context, which will definitely help you from this point onwards. Let Jesus lead you into Grace; read this blog and search for all the teaching on Grace. If you want to find it in the Bible, begin with Paul’s Letter to the Galatians and take it from there.

I hope this has been helpful.

Grace and Peace to you all.


Sorry there’s so many footnotes – more in fact than in any other piece I have written. It’s just that in this post, there are so many side issues that needed to be explained, but without breaking the flow of the main piece. Still, I suppose that’s what footnotes are for… šŸ˜‰

 

Footnotes

Footnotes
1 In this piece, I am describing a different ‘spiritual death’ than that espoused in Evangelical doctrine, which holds that ‘spiritual death’ is what happened to Adam and Eve in the garden. Although God ‘clearly said’ that when you eat the fruit, you will surely die (Gen 2:17), they obviously did not die, else humanity would not exist, if indeed they were the ancestors of all humanity. And so, they invented the term ‘spiritual death’ in order to make that ‘death’ that God warned about into something we can’t see, so that it can be neither proved nor disproved. Clever, eh? Just tack the word ‘spiritual’ on the front and that explains the whole thing without actually explaining anything. In this present case, though, ‘spiritual death’ means the death or extreme (death-like) damage inflicted on a person’s spirit by religious abuse.
2 I define Religion 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.
3 Because I am irrepressible, though, I’m still going to sprinkle a lot of my usual low-key humour through this piece 😜
4 The other thing, of course, is that if their target is not a ‘Christian’, nor indeed anyone else who is expected to just behave themselves, and lie back and take such abuse, then their intended victim will likely just tell them to go and get stuffed. Some more liberated Christians might even do the same, myself included. This suggests to me that these abusers only go for the easier targets; those who will not bite back for fear of appearing ‘less Christian’ to others around them. This makes the abusers also bullies, then, in that they are attacking people they see as weak. Can’t be doing with bullies, not at all.
5 Not long after Fiona’s funeral, and just as our Vicar, Mark, moved on to pastures new, I stopped going to the church. There was no animosity, nor did I leave under a cloud; indeed, I am still friends with those dear people. But our house group had ‘ceased trading’ (the leaders felt they were not called to lead it any more) and I just felt that this was the end of that particular season in my life. As my regular readers will know, I do what I see the Father doing (John 5:19) and this gentle breakaway was indeed what He was doing at the time. So I went with it.
6 Not her real name of course; names have been changed to protect yada yada yada and all that
7 Apart from me learning that Evangelicalism hadn’t changed at all in all the time I had been ‘out’, and the worst parts of it were just as bad as ever, as I was to discover all too soon – in spades!
8 Being a Christian conference, the food was most likely provided by the lowest bidder. People familiar with the ‘generosity’ of Christian organisations will know exactly what I’m talking about. Legend has it that when a ‘sinner’ goes to Hell, they will have to pay for their own handbasket because there’s no way the church will cough up for it šŸ˜‰
9 Edd said later that he was convinced that God didn’t need anyone’s faith to help Him when He made everything!
10 As played by the late genius comedians Les Dawson and Roy Barraclough.
11 Yeah right. My Facebook profile is visible only to my actual FB friends, so no-one else would have seen the comment outside of that circle anyway
12 Like being Autistic is an illness that needs to be cured!!
13 At least, maybe not after she reads this, if she ever sees it. ‘Sally’, if you want to talk about it, you know where I am!
14 That is, my ‘dark night’ followed by my ‘rebirth’
15 Keeping short accounts with God is a peculiarly Evangelical concept (although it has likely been pirated by other denominations too; that’s what religion does) that assumes that every. single. ‘sin’. has to be confessed, individually and specifically, in order for that ‘sin’ to be forgiven. The concept is based on a mis-reading, misinterpretation and/or misapplication of the verse in 1 John 1:9, which says that “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness”. As always with this sort of thing, the concept is, and has been, passed down from generation to generation of Christians without anyone (in that group at least) questioning it or challenging it. They just believe it because they’ve been told it. And it stands in complete contradiction to the other verse in Heb 8:12, which quotes Jer 31:34, which says, “For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more”. When you really think about it, their ‘short accounts’ concept means that just. one. ‘sin’. in the final second of your life means that you will not be forgiven, because you won’t have had chance to ‘confess’ that ‘sin’. So, say you see someone point a pistol at you and in your mind you think ‘You b@stard!’, then that’s it. You used that ‘cuss word’, even though it was only in your head! You never got the chance to ask for forgiveness. You’re toast. What a stupid concept that is!
16 Or even that they don’t want to argue or get angry, because then they would definitely be ‘seen as’ being in the wrong, and they’d be judged and criticised for that too; for simply defending themselves vehemently, and which the abuser has jolly well asked for. In other words, Christians are, or want to be seen as, ‘too nice’ to bite back. This is a tactic which many abusers rely on to avert any come-back. And that’s absolutely disgusting.
17 This clearly demonstrates that, while they expect others to be answerable to them, they do not feel answerable to others! – [Edit]: Actually, I did later get a reply, which, to be completely fair to them, did include an apology!
18 If I use the first-person pronoun euphemism ‘one’ any more, I’m going to start sounding like a member of the Royal Family, so I apologise.
19 The synthesiser disappeared sometime after that; in fact it was at this up-country conference that I heard (from the lady who had taken over from me in the Musical Director’s role in the church) that it had disappeared. Stolen, then!
20 I don’t really care whether that spirit is one of a type of actual ontological beings, or whether it’s simply the way the human mind works when damaged by Religion (I won’t go into details on that) –Ā  still the ‘manifestation’ is the same.
21 See the fourth bullet point in my article here for more on what a ‘Religious spirit’ looks like
22 I have a friend who was expelled from Christ for the Nations because of a certain ‘sin’ he was struggling with. He was expelled because he couldn’t defeat it; all he would have had to do would have been to keep quiet about it, and he’d have been fine. God knew his heart anyway. But, because of his honesty, they penalised him. That’s disgraceful.

Top Tip: Read the Signs!

To members of religious organisations who decide to ignore my ‘No Cold Callers’ signs: Try thinking ouside your box for once.

You ‘think’ that the signs are there to protect *me*, and therefore you ignored them today.

But they’re not; they’re there to protect *you*. Ignore them at your peril, and you will get the full 16-inch broadside again, like you got today.

You really have no idea what you’re messing with!

That was a post I put on Facebook, the day after a couple of ‘evangelists’ from my local Evangelical Church came around to my house uninvited and proceeded to knock on my door, despite there being clear signage asking people not to do so.

I’m going to talk today about why this action of theirs was not only wrong, but also that there are a number of learning points that those two men could maybe consider thinking about.

After our conversation, I gave them the business card for my blog, so who knows; maybe they’re reading this right now. Hello again, gentlemen!

Well then, in Matthew 16:3, Jesus suggests to the Pharisees that maybe they should try reading the signs of the times. And that’s fair enough.

These days, however, it seems that some Christians can’t even read signs that are written down, and displayed clearly and prominently.

Allow me to explain. There are disabled people living in my house. I have people that can’t answer the door due to mobility issues, and people that can’t help but take their time getting to the door because of age-related mobility issues (it takes them longer to get down the stairs, for example) and also people who have neurodivergent issues which means that it is stressful for them to answer the door to complete strangers who will of course be pushing an agenda.

And so we have a couple of defences. We have a Ring doorbell, which enables occupants in the house to screen callers, and to talk to them remotely. I’ve even done it from the local library once, ‘Sorry, I’m not in, please can you leave the package behind the wheelie bin?’ and so on.

But we also have signs on the door telling people that cold callers should not knock/ring. These signs are legally binding, because they state clearly that unsolicited callers are not welcome and that to ring/knock constitutes an offence under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, 2008. And to be fair, sometimes it works. We hear the proximity alert (someone is approaching your door) but they don’t ring the bell, and instead walk away. So far, so good. And we always report the unrepentant to the police; those callers who ignore the signs when they are tradespeople or sales people and then claim that they always ignore such signs. Their punishment is deserved.

However, it has been my experience that the worst offenders for ringing the doorbell when they shouldn’t are people from religious groups. While I have actually seen Jehovah’s Witnesses see the signs, turn around, and walk back up my driveway, to their credit, unfortunately the last time some of them came, they actually rang the bell! And I gave them a theological run for their money and they left wishing they’d never called – not that I was nasty to them, of course, but I told them lots of things they didn’t like me saying. And to be even more fair, religious groups are actually exempt from the door knocking regulations – although I always tell them that ignoring the sign is not a ‘good witness’ for their religion. What does it say about the kind of people they have in their group when they ignore a perfectly reasonable request to not knock? There’s simply no excuse.

So anyway, these two guys turned up a couple of days ago, and I knew they were from my local Evangelical church because they tried to present me with a leaflet and I turned it down, but not before I’d seen the pictures on the leaflet, so I knew their colours.

The following Facebook post sums up the interaction succinctly:

Lol I just had two blokes on my doorstep from our local Evangelical church. They wanted to give me a sermon, but boy did they get one. 🤣

The nature of Grace, and how it abounds even more than the biggest ‘sin’. Their ‘sin fixation’ was highly evident, to be honest. One of them even asked me if I would look at a blonde in a miniskirt going down the street, thus revealing his own heart on such things…

When you preach freedom and Grace, and all they can say is ‘but….’ then you know you’re up against hardened hearts. Still, one of them was listening…but I’m sad to say the other one had a religious spirit. You could just see it, especially the barely concealed anger in him when I declared my support for LGBTQ+ relationships. Like it’s his job to police the opinions of a complete stranger.

Nevertheless, I gave them cards for my blog, with the suggestion to eat the meat and spit out the bones, and be blessed by it. Who knows; maybe the uplifting effect of the true Gospel may have found a mark…

They had opened with a response to my immediate query about how their church copes with LGBTQ people – my Litmus Test. Of course, although they immediately responded by talking about the love of Jesus, they very quickly went into the bait-and-switch of quoting the Bible. Standard operating procedure for evangelists; they hold up the bait of the idea of the loving Jesus, which is a really attractive concept, and then they switch to the Bible and its rules – in this case, they were of course quoting some of the ‘clobber passages'[1]. So Jesus is ok as long as the Bible can be brought in somewhere. It is my new hypothesis that the Bible leads people to Jesus (John 5:39-40), but then the purpose of Christian evangelists is to lead people back to the Bible. I mean, you can’t have Jesus talking to people unsupervised, now can you? Remember, everything Jesus says to a believer has to be held up against the Bible, by other believers, to see if it is valid. This is because the Bible is the third person of the Trinity, of course[2]. </sarcasm off>Ā  šŸ˜‰

The other bait-and-switch, of course, is the Grace-to-legalism switch. I could go on about this, but the idea is basically ‘Come as you are, God will love you anyway’ and then switch to ‘Ok, now we’ve got you, here are the list of rules you have to obey in order to ‘stay saved’. They lay over the top of the pure Jesus experience layers and layers of requirements until the new believer is buried in the mire of religion, and the poor neophyte loses that initial joy because of it. This is what churches do; it’s very, very rare to find a church where the individual’s relationship with Jesus is held as the primary source of their faith; no, it has to be the Bible. Again. Because, again, they don’t trust God to be capable of speaking to a believer Himself[3].

Anyway, here is a list of, shall we say, ‘suggestions’ that I have come up with for people doing door-to-door visitation. Not that I would encourage such presumption in others’ behaviour, of course (I would not encourage door-to-door ministry for many reasons), but since I am Autistic (something else they never knew about; just treat everyone the same, why don’t you, guys) I have of course obsessively analysed the interaction in depth and found many of the flaws in their method. And for those who may unwittingly fall victim to these intruders on your property, I hope that my actually writing out these ‘Top Tips’ will give you things to look out for, and that you can pull them up for. Don’t get me wrong, I know they’re doing it from a sincere heart and with a genuine desire to ‘save’ people, and their courage in doing so is admirable. But as usual their cloistered, out of touch situation of being in a tight church community blinds them to how their ‘ministry’ looks from the outside. Which is not a good thing.

And at the risk of confusing Christians (it has been my constant experience that most Christians can only cope with one talking point at a time), I will list the points below.

Ok, here we go:

  • Don’t be pre-judgmental and assume that everyone you meet will be someone who knows nothing about God and His ways. You don’t know who you might be talking to. In my case, you were talking to an acknowledged genius with an acutely sharp mind, and with in-depth Bible college qualifications, and who has been walking with Jesus for the best part of 45 years.Ā  Hardly someone who is unfamiliar at least with Jesus, and even the Bible too.
  • Related to the above, don’t presume that others are ignorant about the things of God. Even if they’re not someone like me, they too will likely have some sort of spiritual walk, even if it is ‘merely’ being good to other people.
  • Very importantly, don’t ignore signs like mine on the door. It displays your unconcern for others’ feelings and needs if you do ignore the signs, and, furthermore, you may be surprised to learn that others will likely not consider your message as important as you think it is – and certainly not after you have ignored their notices. No, just don’t do it. Period[4].
  • If you have a religious spirit, you’d best stay at home, mate. Such a spirit is more obvious to your audience than you realise; in fact you probably don’t even realise it yourself since your slide into that spirit was so gradual. And it is by far the most off-putting thing in all of Christianity for people to experience someone with a religious spirit. How can you tell if that’s you? To be honest you yourself likely can’t, but a big clue is found in the fact that you are doing this activity in the first place. At the end of the day, you are going out to tell others how wrong they are, and how you have the answers. Don’t try to pretend otherwise, or to try to mask it by feigning concern about your neighbours’ welfare, like it says on your church website. That behaviour is presumptuous, arrogant and artificial, and this too will be detected by your victims. Certainly, talking a lot about ‘sin’ is a dead giveaway for the religious spirit, especially when you start to list your pet peeve ‘sins’. And see below, too, about how this reveals your heart. Also, being prepared to adopt underhand tactics such as those discussed below, are a sign of the religious spirit. You may also find that you have lost your joy somewhere along the line, and your faith now consists of a grey, lifeless adherence to what you see as God’s Law. This is why Paul says that “the written Law brings death” (2Cor 3:6) – but be encouraged! because he immediately follows that assertion in typical Hebrew fashion by saying “but the Spirit gives life”. Linked with that loss of joy, you will likely also have lost your sense of humour, partially because you have to be selective about what you allow yourself to find as funny, and also because laughter needs some sort of joy to fuel it – and your joy tanks are dry. Finally, the religious spirit always has to have the last word. He 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. If what he had to say was that good, he’d have used it during the general discussion, rather than as a shot at someone’s back when there is little chance of a rejoinder. This is the religious spirit; that’s what it looks like.
  • Listen more than you talk. Your audience needs to feel valued and listened to, and you need to tailor your replies to their words. This is what’s called ‘basic conversational skills’ and, having been walled up in a closed community of like-minded people, you’ve probably never had the chance to learn it properly.
  • Remember: you started it[5]. You turned up at their house unannounced, uninvited and unexpected. If people say things you don’t like, remember you put yourself in the situation voluntarily and in fact you didn’t ask the householder if it was voluntary on their part. None of this ‘is this a convenient time?’ or anything, because you assume again that what you have to say is so much more important than anything they would possibly rather be doing in their own house. Remember you weren’t asked to come and visit and you’re there on the homeowner’s sufferance. Respect that and don’t assume any sort of entitlement.
  • In my case, you failed to recognise my Autism. Granted, I mask it very well. But the take-home message here is that you should always be aware that everyone is different and, therefore, their responses will stem from vastly different thought processes, backgrounds and motivations, none of which you can assume you are right about. Something they never teach at churches is that one size definitely does not fit all. But of course you will not believe that, since as far as you people believe, there is only one way to ‘get saved’, and that’s by your way. You assume that when Jesus spoke of a ‘narrow way’, a) you understand what He meant, and b) you have found that ‘narrow way’. Of course you have; how lucky that was for you.[6]
  • Please stop doing the old ‘Bait and switch’ – switching Grace for Law and Jesus for Bible. You bait with Jesus, and you end up giving them the Bible. You claim to preach Grace, but as with most churches that claim they are ‘into’ Grace, in reality it’s nothing of the sort. You just impose a set of rules for people to follow (Matthew 23:4), and that’s called ‘Law’ in anyone’s book. What you are doing by using this method is no different from the tricks used by pushy and disreputable salespeople. You claim to be ‘in the world, but not of it’. Why not prove it. then, by not adopting ‘worldly’ tricks like this one.
  • Related to the point above, even though you begin by saying you preach Jesus, in actual fact you really preach the Bible. Your rulebook says in John 5:39-40 that the Bible leads people to Jesus. And yet it seems to the victim that your task is actually to lead them all the way back to the Bible again. You’re not on your own, of course; most Evangelical churches do this exact same thing; this is to me a sure sign of the, yes, apostasy in today’s Evangelical church. Stick to Jesus. Relate your testimony of all the good He’s done in your life. Describe how your relationship with Him works, and how much it blesses you. If you can’t do that, then I would suggest that you don’t really have a relationship with Jesus Himself, but instead you have one with the Bible. If that’s the case, then you should not be going out lying to people by claiming that you do indeed have that Relationship with Jesus Himself. As Don Francisco once said, “If all you know of God is from books, you are walking in deep darkness”.
  • Remember that you will meet all kinds of people, including fellow Christians who are further on in the faith than you are. Accept that, and be prepared to listen and learn. If you remain teachable, then you will find that you will learn something from most if not all of your conversations, even with ‘unbelievers’. Do not disregard the wisdom of the world; it too can come out with some real gems, as you’d see if you looked at some of the posts in my ‘quotations’ series[7]. And you likely have forgotten this Scripture, but again your own Rulebook says in 1 Corinthians 2:15 that ‘The spiritual man judges all things [note, not people – Ed] butĀ he himself is not subject to human judgment.Ā And therefore you shall not judge any fellow believer that you meet on the doorsteps. If you do this, then that believer may well give you nuggets from God that you were not expecting, you will not want to hear, and which may well change your life for the better. Of course, your hardened heart will protect you from this to some extent, but, well, you have been warned! For one of the visitors the other day (and yes, it was the guy with the religious spirit!), his parting shot was “You need to spend more time in the Word!” Spend more time in the word, you say! How on earth do you think that I managed to quote all that Scripture, from memory complete with chapter and verse, to you if I wasn’t completely steeped in the Scriptures? Look, your own Rulebook says in Colossians 3:16, ‘Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly…’ and, for the last nearly 45 years, that is exactly what I have done. The fruit of that is shown by my extensive knowledge of the Scriptures and by my extensive scholarship in the Bible and its concepts[8]. You were simply closed to what the Spirit was saying to you, as well as being so focused on your own thoughts that you were unable even to discern what was going on around you. I was fully conscious of the huge anointing on me as I spoke to you, and you were seemingly impervious to it. I am sad to say that it seems you have a long way to go before you get a hold of the freedom that Jesus actually offers you – but who knows? He may just reveal it all to you in a flash, just like He did for me all those years ago. He may well surprise you, and I sincerely hope He does. Your life will never be the same again.
  • Looking at the above bullet point from a slightly different angle, remember that when Christians meet, they are supposed to bless each other. And that was what I tried to do, by explaining the wonder of Grace to you.
    But all you did was to try to argue your way out of God’s Grace, to almost try to explain why it didn’t apply to you, and also try to drag me down with you.
    Why would you want to do that; to deny yourselves such blessing, and also try to destroy mine as well? I mean, why? Now, I fully understand that you will meet with hostility on your ā€˜rounds’. But you don’t need to assume that fellow Christians will be equally hostile. Even once I had declared myself as a Christian, you remained hostile; in fact you actually got worse. As if you were annoyed that someone calling himself a Christian could possibly believe something different from you. So rather than share blessings, you simply turned nasty. All you’re doing with this attitude is to miss out on so much more blessing, and on learning more about Jesus from someone who has a different point of view, but which nonetheless will likely complement yours nicely. And so, you didn’t share blessing; you shared disquiet and discord. When you go out, it’s supposed to be ā€˜peace on this house’. But you didn’t share any peace at all.
  • Related to the above, I noticed that once I ‘came out’ as a Christian, you immediately switched attitude. In short, you assumed that because I am a fellow believer, you were suddenly entitled to make unwanted input into my life. What gives you the right or permission to do that? Do you think that because we have the same Father, you can suddenly tell me what to do or think, or judge my attitudes more harshly than just the general ‘oh he’s an unbeliever’ judgments you would reserve for those who do not profess belief? Why should I suddenly be subjected to a new set of standards, coupled with your belief that I should abide by them? I saw your anger when I declared my support for same-sex relationships, after you knew that I am a Christian. I mean what?? And then your parting shot of saying ‘You should get into the Word more’. How dare you! Would you have used that on a non-believer? No, because you wanted to present a ‘nice’ front to people who might want to make the mistake of coming to your church[9]. But of course once you know I’m a believer, that all changes; you know that I know what churches are like, so there’s no need to pretend any more. If I’d never owned up, you’d have kept your ‘speaking to an unbeliever attitude’! Honestly, you guys make me sick. God knew all along about my attitudes, but He didn’t see fit to inform you of them, and therefore they’re not all that important to Him in the context. Why should anything be any different because all of a sudden you know things that God has known all along? It’s because you have an exaggerated sense of self-importance; you think that God can’t manage dealing with His children in His own way; you have to do it on his behalf. And that’s a pathetic attitude.
  • Don’t use proof-texting. It is disrespectful both to your victim and to the Bible itself, for so many reasons. Check out my blog post here, including the comments section where I give bonus content, for more details on this.
  • I presume that your church is one of those who believe that the Bible is not only inspired, but also infallible and inerrant, as partially evidenced by the line on your website that declares that declining belief in the Bible is largely due to the teaching of evolution in schools and other establishments. Well, in regards to inerrancy, and also related to the bullet point above, a point which is which is universally missed by Biblical inerrantists is this. If you insist on providing ‘proof texts’ which contradict any text quoted by your victim, this is actually declaring that you do not believe in inerrancy. Inerrancy means that the Bible is never wrong. Inerrancy also infers (and this is backed up by inerrantists who claim, when challenged) that the Bible does not contradict itself, despite you using those verses to do so. Well, any honest reading will immediately show this assertion to be incorrect (in Proverbs 26:4-5 for just one example of many). But my point is this: simply by quoting a Scripture verse that contradicts another Scripture verse just given by your victim, you are showing that the Bible does indeed contradict itself. And, while you may be blind to this, your victims will not be, especially those who are well-versed in the Scriptures. The problem is actually not so much with the Bible, but more with what you are expecting it to do. If you expect it to give you unified cast-iron rules, methods, opinions and doctrines, then you will be sorely disappointed. This is because, while the Bible is undoubtedly inspired, it was still written by many people in different cultures and time periods, and who had each had their own encounter with God in their own, unique way. While their lessons and experiences are priceless even to us today, you should not expect the Bible to present a unified front, at least not on the surface level of the words written. It was never intended for that, and if you simply throw out the concept of inerrancy, then that will solve the problem. It is simply not the case that the Bible loses its authority just because it is seen for what it is, and what it is not. Yes, there are contradictions, but these can still be used to edify and build up those who read them. To come back to the Proverbs 26:4,5 example above, if it is read as Hebrew parallelism rather than just as a plain pair of inerrant but yet still contradictory statements, then it is far more useful. Applying a similar idea to the rest of the Bible, inerrancy becomes redundant and the Bible is far more understandable because of it – even to the layman.
  • Stop focusing on ‘sin’. Your Rulebook says in Philippians 4:8, “Finally, brothers and sisters, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things”. That’s good advice, and will take your eyes off ‘sin’, at least until you realise how much you miss thinking about ‘sin’, that is. And then, sadly and in all likelihood, you’ll likely return to it like a dog to its vomit (Prov 26:11) šŸ˜‰
  • Finally, be aware that if you start suggesting things as examples of things that you consider ‘sinful’, you will likely inadvertently be exposing your own heart, its predilections and its hidden ‘sin wishes’. People are more perceptive about dead giveaways like this than you give them credit for. So if your idea of a ‘temptation’ is, as one of you suggested yesterday, ‘a blonde in a miniskirt wearing a low-cut top'[10], then you need to know that you are betraying your fantasy to the world at large. I wonder if your wife knows about this particular leaning….[11]

So, there we go. If you’re going to come around and visit me again, you’ll need more than just your Bibles, boys. Unless you want to hear about Grace, in which case I’m all yours. šŸ˜€

Grace and Peace to all my readers.

[Postscript, September 2025]: I feel it is important to add that this visit, my deep thinking, consideration and prayer that followed it, and this article which resulted from that consideration, all added together to inspire my series ‘The Problems of Evangelicalism‘. Indeed, so pivotal was this essay that I reblogged it as part of the series itself. It’s funny how God triggers inspiration sometimes…. šŸ˜€

Footnotes

Footnotes
1 The Clobber Passages are the six main Scriptural passages that Fundies quote when trying to prove that homosexuality is somehow wrong
2 The Holy Trinity, for those dependent on Biblical inerrancy, is of course Father, Son and Holy Bible
3 Of course, they would couch this in terms of ‘the human heart is deceitful above all things’ (Jer 17:9), and therefore it’s the believer that they don’t trust to hear God correctly – notwithstanding that they conveniently forget that someone in Christ is a new creation (2Cor5:17) where that deceitful heart has been swapped out for a ‘new’ heart (Eze 36:26). In which case God might as well not bother, so it amounts to the same thing
4 A few days after this incident, I actually wrote to the church to complain about the evangelists having ignored my signs. Of course, there was no reply. So I wrote again. Like I’m just going to forget? And I did then get a reply, which, to be completely fair to them, did include an apology and a note that they had mentioned to their boys that they shouldn’t knock on doors where it says not to. So I have to give them credit for that!
5 ‘We did not start it!’ ‘Yes you did, you invaded Poland!’ – Fawlty Towers, Series 1, Episode 6, ‘The Germans
6 Another thing with that ‘narrow way’ business (Mt 7:14) is that you presume that this Scripture means that most people will be lost – they will go to Hell – and few will be saved. Other considerations from this repugnant idea aside, there’s this: If you consider that those words are true, and that they mean what you believe they mean, then why on Earth would youĀ ever, ever consider having children? Because, if this stuff is true, then there is a far greater chance of them ending up in Hell than of them going to Heaven. And don’t imagine for one second that their simply being your kids will protect them, because, as you so gleefully and openly proclaim, ‘God has no grandchildren’. Each person, according to you, must make their own decision and then live by your rules (oh, sorry, I forgot, they’re God’s rules, aren’t they, because you say so) for the rest of their lives, on pain of Hell if they dare to be guilty of ‘falling away’. You will of course ignore this, but that’s the state of it if what you believe is actually correct.
7 The reason why controlling religious leadership tells people not to consider ‘worldly wisdom’ is because they don’t want you to obtain knowledge outside of their carefully curated list of ‘approved sources’. This is about as culty as it gets. I would even go so far as to say that if a leader tells you not to read a certain book (some years ago, and maybe even today, that would have been ‘The Shack‘ by Wm. Paul Young), then you should immediately pause that conversation and go and order the disapproved-of book straight away. Truth comes in many forms, and not all of them – in fact very few of them – come from Religion’s approved sources
8 And that without it being the third person of my Trinity!
9 Rest assured, I personally shall never do that!
10 ‘A blonde in a miniskirt’ has since become a meme in my family; a meme for people obsessed with ‘sin’, especially the sexual-type ‘sin’ so beloved of Evangelicals. Thank you for the laugh and for the meme; we will treasure it always!
11 In fact, I would even suggest, in all seriousness, that you should notify your Church’s safeguarding team about your lust problem. Let’s be honest: that’s really what you were talking about here, isn’t it?

Be like Chad

I have noticed a phenomenon which I find quite amusing, and also a bit unsettling, if I’m honest.

When Christians meet other Christians that they don’t know, there immediately follows a period of religious butt-sniffing, like dogs do when they meet.

The idea for each person is to categorise the other people into the person’s self-designed pigeonholes, so that they know where they stand. Are you a Protestant, are you a Baptist, are you Like Me, and for some, sadly, there’s even the attitude of ‘are there things that you disagree with me on, so that I must settle those differences by telling you how wrong you are, before we can ever get along?’ In short, they are generating ‘labels’.

But I’m not having any of that.

This is where listening more than talking comes in. I don’t declare my own definitions openly; they are mine and mine alone. In any case, I am Autistic and the standard pigeonholes do not apply to me anyway, because I am wired differently. And no, I am not using Autism as a label in its own right, because it has been my experience that even amongst Autistic people, they are all wired differently from each other. There is no ‘standard definition’ of an Autistic person and as such we are all different; all equally unpredictable.

It’s funny; I met a Christian man about 24 years ago who, when we did the religious butt-sniffing thing on him (I was different then!), he just stayed silent.

He ‘went’ to a particular church but it seemed like he was only loosely attached.

But a more Christlike man I have never met. He never declared himself; never showed any affiliation other than to Jesus.

Chad was his name.

I want to be like Chad.

A Personal Message to Someone I Met

Hi there

I don’t know your name, but it was lovely to have that interesting and gentle conversation with you yesterday, despite our having only just met, at Sainsbury’s in Bridgwater in Somerset. Hearing a lady whistling a Vineyard song from the 1980s was so unusual, I just had to come over and say something!

Our conversation began over that worship song – ‘Change My Heart O God’, from the Vineyard in about 1986. In reply to your question, I declared that Yes, God has indeed changed my heart in dramatic ways, but not in ways that many Christians can cope with. Remember, it’s not up to me how God changes me; it’s just my task to follow where He leads, and that’s going to be different for each of us.

Having received the tendered business card for my blog, and the accompanying explanation, I appreciate that meeting a Spirit-filled Christian who doesn’t believe in Hell must have come as a bit of a shock to you. Maybe that was something a little outside your experience, and I apologise for shocking you with that little nugget. I must say I did warn you, though, that I was an heretic!

I may have got this wrong – I am Autistic, so I don’t always pick up properly on what people are saying…but it seemed that your assumption was that I don’t believe in the Bible either. Well, I really do believe in it – subject to an intelligent reading, taking into account things like literary and historical context, type of literature and similar factors, and all this reading with the Person of Jesus in mind and the Holy Spirit doing His usual narrative in my spirit.

I don’t know if you’re aware of this, but some people have different interpretations to Scripture passages than do others. In this case, the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus was, I think, the passage you were referring to. I always have to remind myself that when Jesus was speaking in parables, He was deliberately being slightly obfuscatory, where some thinking in his listeners would be necessary in order to glean the nuggets of wisdom contained within. Parables are all about hidden meanings. But one of the key things about parables is that they are stories with a meaning, and the very last thing that they are meant for is to be taken literally. If you read the context of that Parable, it’s all about the Jews not bearing fruit despite repeated exhortations from God. And there are as many different interpretations of most Scriptures, not just the Parables, as there are people reading them. Except for the Jehovah’s Witnesses; they are all told what to believe and no dissension is allowed. We don’t want to be like that. But this is the reason why there are so many – tens of thousands, in fact – Christian denominations!

Please let me reiterate that I have the highest respect for the Bible, as long as it is used correctly. I am a Bible college graduate who knows the Bible inside out; I have several sections memorised by heart; and I quote from it regularly in my writings, usually using passages that I have found already to be true in my life. I’m sorry I couldn’t explain things to you properly, but as I said, I am Autistic, and my main medium for communication is in writing, like here in my blog. I find it very hard to communicate face-to-face, because of a number of factors. The main thing is that I can’t understand body language, and so, for me, interfacing with others is often like speaking only half a language. Also, because of the way my thought processes work, I can’t formulate proper trains of speech on the spur of the moment; I need time to consider replies properly, and so my face-to-face interactions come across as a series of disjointed arguments which only make sense in my own thought patterns. These patterns make perfect sense to me, but they won’t make sense to someone we would call a Neurotypical (NT); a non-derogatory term meaning someone whose brain is wired ‘normally’, whereas the brain of someone with Asperger’s Syndrome (my particular Autistic Spectrum Condition) is wired differently from those of NT people.

I can – and I have done it many times – stand up in front of hundreds of people and lead them in worship, or preach a sermon. It comes easily to me, but that’s because in that situation I don’t need to do any interpersonal interactions. But put me one-on-one, and I am usually at a complete loss.

So, yes, it was lovely to meet you and yes, we are greatly enjoying our holiday here in Somerset. I think next time I meet a fellow believer, though, I will let them see what fruit I have in my life before mentioning a contentious issue. He is indeed the Potter, and I am the clay. Who am I to contest the work He’s doing in my life? Isaiah 29:16 says this:

You turn things upside down,
as if the potter were thought to be like the clay!
Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it,
“You did not make me”?
Can the pot say to the potter,
“You know nothing”?

– Is 29:16

I wouldn’t dream of changing the things He’s done in my life, nor unlearning the things He’s taught me. For me, once I have tasted, there is no untasting. Once I have seen, there is no unseeing. Once I have been given something from God, I cannot and will not reject it, because His calling and gifts are irrevocable (Rom 11.29). I have to do what I see the Father doing (Jn 5:19); how else could I honour God’s calling on my life?

To better understand where I was coming from, all I can suggest is that you read some of my blog posts – there are over 500 of them to pick from – with an open mind and see how I came into the freedom I have, and what that freedom looks like. Maybe you too might be able to catch a glimpse of the wide-open spaces of God’s Grace and move out even further into the broad, sunlit uplands of freedom in the Spirit, guided by the Master’s Hand. Remember that, as a Christian of 38 years’ standing, I will not have reached the conclusions and positions I have reached without a great deal of study, thought and prayer.

And don’t worry, I wouldn’t dream of dissing your faith or your beliefs. I’m not saying you don’t already know Him; you do. I’m not saying you don’t already have freedom; you do. But there is so much more to learn, and so much deeper depths of God, and so much wider freedom than you may know. I have heard people talking about ‘pressing in’ to God; well, that’s what it looks like. As C. S. Lewis once wrote, ‘Further up and further in!’, and this is a never-ending process.

I hope this hasn’t come across as condescending; that would never be my intention. As you are probably aware, Autism means that sometimes people lack the social graces necessary to keep others comfortable. If that’s the case here, I am sorry. It also means that, when you first meet someone, you really don’t know what sort of filters and barriers that person is trying to overcome in order to try to communicate. One thing’s for sure, though. Next time, it will not be the case that I virtually introduce myself as someone who does not believe in Hell. That’s always going to get a conversation off on the wrong foot!

Keep on singing the songs, dear sister. And always bear in mind that someone might come into hearing range and start harmonising with your music, and your worship… šŸ˜‰

Peace and Grace to you.

– Anthony


Yes, the header picture is actually of the Bridgwater branch of Sainsbury’s. Well, I am quite pedantic; no other picture would do šŸ˜‰

Asperger’s Syndrome is a Gift

I am an Aspie.

I have a diagnosis of Asperger’s Syndrome, an Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) which simply means that my mind is ‘wired’ differently from the minds of non-ASD people – people for whom Aspies have a non-derogatory term of ‘neurotypicals’ or ‘NT’. Rather than rehash the whole thing, I will simply refer you to my previous piece on the subject, and it’s here.

My own personal take on it – I was only diagnosed in 2013 – is that I see it as a gift, not as a hindrance. The reduced capabilities in some areas of life are, to my mind, more than compensated for by the tremendous benefits it brings. I have never thought of my ‘condition’ as a ‘disorder’, an illness, or a defect of any kind; to me, this is my ‘normal’. I have even rejected offers from people wanting to pray for me to be ‘healed’ from it (from hopefully well-meaning) people who simply lacked knowledge*. No, the term ‘disorder’ is not a helpful one. In fact, in many ways, my mind is more ‘ordered’ than that of a NT.

And I used to jokingly say that I thought that Asperger’s is the next stage in human evolution, and of course I received severe teasing for that from Fiona and my family whenever I did something silly. ‘Oh. look what the next stage in human evolution has done this time!’

But then I found a YouTube video about Asperger’s featuring a gentleman whom I consider to be the leading world authority on Asperger’s Syndrome. And he too sees it as a gift, and at the end of the video his last line is “…is Asperger’s the next stage in human evolution?” Clearly, he’s been thinking ‘outside the box’ too! (Or, as Aspies would say, ‘What box?!’)

I also noticed several things in the video that really clicked with me. But I won’t spoil the fun…this video is about 26 minutes long, but if you either have Asperger’s Syndrome yourself, or you know someone who has it and you want to understand them a little better, then this will be 26 minutes well spent.

Here’s the video. Enjoy!


*Although one was a raving (literally) Fundie who was having a go at me!

The Aspergic Christian

My regular readers will know that I have an Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) called ‘Asperger’s Syndrome’. I’m Aspergic; I’m an ‘Aspie’, and I’m proud of it!*

I’ve written this piece for two reasons. Firstly, in order to help other believers who have Asperger’s Syndrome, to help them see how they ‘fit in’ to the Church and the Things of God. To help them cope with people who do not see the world, the Church and the Father in quite the same way as they do. And secondly, in order to inform that majority of people who are not Aspergic – we Aspies call them ‘Neurotypicals’, or ‘NTs’ – a non-derogatory term simply meaning that their brains are wired ‘typically’, or ‘normally’, as in, like those of ‘most’ people. I hope that NT readers of this article will be able to gain some insight as to how we Aspies think. I will use the abbreviation ‘NTs’ in this article. Aspies’ brains are, however, ‘wired differently’.

aspie1

For example, one of the things that Aspies do exceptionally well is to think ‘outside the box’. In fact, for many Aspies, there is no box!

aspie_box

I mention this because it is important that we understand right from the beginning that Aspies do not think like NTs. It means that some NTs may find it hard to follow their lines of reasoning, and may even wonder how they arrive at the conclusions they do. This is all part of it. In fact, I am very blessed in that my boss is great: he often invites me to give my perspective in meetings precisely because I offer a (sometimes very) different viewpoint from everyone else. I think of things that no-one else does. And he likes to take advantage of that. Granted, NTs too can think outside the box, but some Aspies really excel at it.

Anyway, I know how hard it can be to ‘fit in’ to any ‘community’ of NTs, especially in a Church where maybe people have set lines drawn that it is ‘forbidden’ to cross; the Aspie, however, doesn’t even notice these lines! Here, then, I present some ‘tips’ for Aspergic Christians, and indeed for Aspies in general; I do not feel I am being presumptuous in offering these because a) I am Aspie; I wouldn’t recognise presumption if it bit me on the bum, and b) I’m writing from 50+ years’ experience in interfacing with NTs. Here we go, then:

  • Despite its name, Asperger’s Syndrome is not a ‘condition’ or a ‘syndrome’ in the sense that it’s not an illness. There is nothing wrong with you; you’re just different from others. You can’t ‘cure’ it because there’s nothing wrong to cure; it’s simply the way you are made. In some ways, it’s the ultimate in individuality!
  • Give yourself a break – (as in, ‘Gimme a break, willya!’) – don’t be too hard on yourself! As an Aspie, you may have perfectionist tendencies, but you don’t have to be a slave to perfectionism. Go easy on yourself.
  • Remember that other people will not see things as you do. Give them a break too. People might not see or understand things that to you seem obvious. And their points of view will be different. This does not necessarily mean that either of you are wrong.
  • Sometimes you might find that you can listen to several conversations at once, or perhaps you find your mind spinning with thoughts and ideas while in a conversation. One of the things I found hardest was finding a way to integrate this into times when I was in a conversation with one person. It’s sometimes hard to stay on track with the conversation because your mind wants to fly off at a tangent, and it’s easy to get distracted, or to stop listening. This is often normal for an Aspie, but it can be disconcerting for the other person. So here are some ideas on how to help others to be more comfortable when in conversation with you:
    • It’s best if you think before you speak.
    • Try to talk about them and their interests, not about you and yours. This helps to make you concentrate on listening to them, and also people like talking about themselves, so will feel good about talking to you. Make a point of taking an interest in what they say and in them as a person.
    • Try not to interrupt people, but wait until it is your turn to speak. This might be signalled by them looking at you while they wait for your reply.
    • An interesting trick is to try to hear one point that the person says, and store that up in your mind. Then later, when it’s your turn to speak, use that point to make it look as if you were listening fully. This isn’t deception; this is a learned social skill that can help others relate to you. For example, you might hear that the person is an Arsenal supporter. When it’s your turn to speak, you can ask, for example, how their defence has been playing, or perhaps if their striker is on form.
    • Learn how to be aware that you are boring someone. If you have been talking for more than a couple of minutes on your most fascinating subject, and they haven’t been able to get a word in, the chances are they will be bored. And, at that point, look at their body language; that is what boredom looks like! And then give them a turn to speak!
    • If you have a pedantic nature – and many Aspies do – then if they say something that your pedantic nature disagrees with, feel free to hold your tongue; you don’t have to refute everyone’s mistakes, and you are not going to change the world – or anyone’s mind – by saying something without thinking about it first!
  • As an Aspie, you will have ‘super powers’. They give you a view on reality that few NTs can see, if any, and sometimes, insights that are simply lost to NTs. However, you might not realise that they are super powers because to you they are completely normal. You can’t imagine that others can’t do the things you can do. Your super powers might be, for example, a heightened sense of smell or hearing, maybe a gift for navigation. One of my best friends, also an Aspie, has a gift for being able to feel exactly what his car is doing when he is driving, and his mind projects the best driving line on the road into his mind as a series of coloured lines. Blue line for safe, red line for danger, and so on. Discover your super powers! Rejoice in your super powers!
  • Keep your super powers secret if you can; this may sound crazy to NTs, but superheroes in the comics and the movies have secret identities – and that’s for two reasons: firstly, so the bad guys can’t use their friends and families to get at the superheroes; and secondly because if people know that you have super powers, they will expect you to use them all the time (“What do you mean, you didn’t hear the phone ring? You’re supposed to have super-hearing!!”). This way, you get to choose when and where to use your super powers, and maybe use them quietly and in an understated way so that others don’t discover them! And also, some people in Churches will certainly not understand and might even be suspicious of you. This is normal, because they may be afraid of something they a) don’t understand and b) can’t control.
  • You think differently from other people. It is very likely that God made you this way so that you can see aspects of Him that most others cannot see. Whether you choose to pass on these insights to others, or not, is for you to decide. But perhaps try the idea out on a trusted friend first.
  • In light of the above comment, this means that you will be able to see things about God that others don’t, and/or see things in a different way from others, and sometimes you might be afraid of being seen as an heretic or something. Don’t be. You have been gifted with insight that others don’t have; you can bring people things from God that others cannot**. God is so much bigger than any of our little man-made opinions, and He rejoices in your abilities even if others, through a lack of understanding, can’t or won’t. You may experience rejection because of this, even by – and, sometimes, especially by – other Christians. Remember at the end of the day it’s God’s opinion that matters, not that of humans.
  • Remember that you also have the ‘Mind of Christ’ and all the other aspects of the New Nature that Christ gives. You have the Holy Spirit, you have the assurance of His witness in your heart. You are just as much a New Creation as other believers; just because you are ‘different’ it doesn’t negate any of this. Don’t let others convince you otherwise; I have had people question my salvation status because of the way I think, and I was having none of it!
  • Remember to love yourself. If you’re to love your neighbour as yourself (Mark 12:31), you can’t really do this easily unless you love yourself properly. This involves being comfortable with who you are, Aspie and all! šŸ™‚
  • You decide as to whether to ‘come out’ as Aspie, or not. It’s entirely up to you.
  • Although being Aspie has some disadvantages, sometimes (but not always), these can be overcome with a little practice. Apply your mind to the problem. Try to develop coping strategies, like the ones in the paragraphs above about how to hold conversations with others. You will find that with use and practice, you actually learn to appreciate others and what they think, and this makes it easier to relate to them.
  • And finally, remember that being Autistic is classed as a ‘disability’. This can give you two advantages in the employment stakes: firstly, it is worth bearing in mind that your employer has to make ‘reasonable adjustments’; and secondly, you will also count towards your employer’s ‘equal opportunities’ disabled persons quota. And for severe Autism, where you need help to get along in daily life, you can get benefits to help with this. At least this is the case in the UK, at the time of writing; other countries may of course differ. There are links on the National Autistic Society’s website about this sort of thing; click the logo below to visit their site, where there is also lots of really useful information about coping with Asperger’s Syndrome.

*For those unfamiliar with Asperger’s Syndrome, or for those who would just like a bit more insight into what it’s all about, you can do no better than to check out the National Autistic Society’s pages on Asperger’s Syndrome; click the logo below to go to the first page (there’s a series of pages to look through but it’s all very informative)

autistic_society

**This is why some of my blog entries represent some quite unusual ideas about God and His Kingdom.


For my own background, I’d just say that I always knew I was ‘different’. All my life, I have learned to adjust to living life in a society where I was not understood for much of the time. We’d suspected I was Aspergic; I’d done some tests online (just Google ‘Asperger quiz’) and I’d always shown as a ‘possible’. However, it wasn’t until I undertook a proper series of tests that I got my ‘diagnosis’, for want of a better term for something that isn’t really an illness. I was ‘diagnosed’ at the age of 50, and it was really a great relief to know just why and how I was different! And I love being Aspie.

If you feel you need to be tested for Asperger’s, or any other ASD, the place to start is with your GP, where you should ask to be referred for the tests. And don’t let them fob you off; you are allowed to insist, or if that fails, ask another doctor.