As we have journeyed through Leviticus and Numbers we have shown two teaching videos to help give an overview of the books. If you did not see them or would like to review them, then here they are!
Leviticus:
Numbers:
Author: sweetpeacardco
The Sabbath
The Sabbath[1]
As we read the through the Old Testament numerous things are bound to challenge us, because they are unfamiliar, complex and sometimes because we have avoided reading them and now are confronted by them. I would suggest the latter is true of a reading from Tuesday’s passage on the Sabbath (today known as the Lord’s Day). This is especially the case today as many Christians and churches dismiss the Sabbath as no longer being authoritative for the Church (while inconsistently upholding the other 9 of the 10 commandments).
The challenging passage read:
A Sabbathbreaker Executed
While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. And the LORD said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the LORD commanded Moses. (Numbers 15:32-36 ESV)
Inter-tangled in this passage is both a moral law (keep the Sabbath) and a judicial law (stoning). While Israel’s judicial law is no longer authoritative[2] Christians have always taken seriously the principles behind them and often structured western laws upon them. The law does underscore the importance of the Sabbath as part of God’s law and puts it forward as a foundational element of fostering a healthy relationship with Him. It has been instituted—for our benefit—as a chief means of grace to bless humanity and the Church.
Given that we are reading the Old Testament we have come across the Sabbath a lot and will continue to do so. Indeed the Sabbath (not “sabbath”) is a central theme in the Bible. We recently came across the Sabbath in Ex 20:8-11 (did anyone notice the greatest stress in length is applied to this command?). In this week’s morning sermon Stewart Heap also drew our attention in Lev 26 to three things that we essential for either bringing blessings or curses to the Israelites: 1) not making idols, 2) keeping the LORD’s Sabbaths and 3) upholding His statutes and commandments.
Have you ever wondered about the relationship between the 1st and 4th commands in the 10 Commandments? Why is the Sabbath on the “God side” of the two tablets? Why did the prophets dwell so often and so particularly on these two commands? “The answer is uncomfortable but important. Here was the reason: the Sabbath reveals our idols. The prophets knew that where there is idolatry, there you will find a people struggling – if even trying – to keep the Sabbath; and where the Sabbath is a burden, there you will find a people caught up in all kinds of idolatry. What is it that keeps them from obeying the Sabbath? What is it they find hard to give up? What is it they would rather be doing? There it is. Now you know their idol.”[3] But do we take this all as seriously as the passage suggests?
When we are not delighting in the Lord and His Sabbath (Isa 58:13-14), we are delighting in something else, which in turn weakens our relationship with Him and the overall health of the Church. Delighting in God and delighting in the Lord’s Day go hand in hand. Are you delighting in the Lord’s Day, if not what idol does this reveal that needs to be addressed so you can honour His day and Him?
This was something understood by the Enlightenment thinker Voltaire. He said, if you wish to destroy the Christian religion you must first destroy the Christian Sunday. While subversive it was a wise and truthful observation.
God, in His grace, gave us His day for countless reasons that cannot fit within this blog, however, chief among them was to combat idolatry and to draw us towards a greater delight in our relationship with Him. Isn’t that what every Christian should want?
Let me impress this point by closing with an example from history. In recent decades many western Christians, following societal trends instead of God’s word, have followed suit by casting off the “burden” of the Sabbath. The largest point in case to the aforementioned conversation and to the divine authority of the Lord’s Day comes by asking the question, has it helped the cause of Christ? In history, however, our gospel forebearers knew how vitally important keeping and spending a profitable Lord’s Day was to their own spiritual health, that of their local church and the cause of authentic Christianity across the land.
William Wilberforce, abolitionist, evangelical and Sabbatarian commended the day in the following way and is but one of many famed evangelical examples that would include the Puritans, John Wesley, George Whitefield, John Newton, Rowland Hill, Charles Spurgeon, J.C. Ryle… Their views on the Lord’s Day cannot be divorced from other things for which they are remembered for. Wilberforce said in two separate letters:
There is nothing in which I would recommend you to be more strictly resolute than in keeping the Sabbath holy…. I can truly declare to you, that to me the institution of the Sabbath has been invaluable…. I have said a great deal on this subject: it is because I am deeply impressed with its importance.
…I don’t say it lightly, I believe the contempt into which the Sabbath has fallen, bids fair to accelerate the ruin both of church and state more than any other single circumstance whatever; and it is the bounded duty of every friend to our civil happiness no less than to our religious interests, to hold up its authority… it is one of those things wherein the duty is so obvious and binding, that in doing it there can be little exertion; in leaving it undone, great blame.
May we delight in Him,
Pastor Chris
[1] This is a massive subject. I would love to chat about it more for anyone who is interested and provide further resources if you are care to studying the subject further.
[2] An example of this would be Eph 6:1. Here Paul continues to urge children to honour their parents but he drops the threat of stoning.
[3] Credited to a good friend of mine.
Mary Jones Training Walk
On Saturday eight of us walked 13.2 miles in preparation for our coming chapel Mary Jones 
“pilgrimage” in Wales on April 1. As we live in South Gloucestershire (William Tyndale country) we took the opportunity to use two locations as natural bookends. We began at St. Adeline’s Church where Tyndale pastored from 1521-23 and closed our walk at the Tyndale monument which stands above the community in which he was born in 1494. The monument also commemorates his martyrdom on October 6, 1536, outside Brussels where he was burned alive so that the English plough boy might find salvation through the Word of God.
Over the course of our walk we reflected upon these words from Psalm 19:
[7] The law of the LORD is perfect,
reviving the soul;
the testimony of the LORD is sure,
making wise the simple;
[8] the precepts of the LORD are right,
rejoicing the heart;
the commandment of the LORD is pure,
enlightening the eyes;
[9] the fear of the LORD is clean,
enduring forever;
the rules of the LORD are true,
and righteous altogether.
[10] More to be desired are they than gold,
even much fine gold;
sweeter also than honey
and drippings of the honeycomb.
[11] Moreover, by them is your servant warned;
in keeping them there is great reward.
Verse 10 helpfully captures how Tyndale and Mary Jones valued God’s word. They were both willing to go to great lengths to obtain something beyond value. Our physical perseverance helped focus our attention on that lesson.
Once at the monument we concluded with a short, albeit windy, service. We read Matthew 7:24-29 from Tyndale’s 1526 New Testament and concluded with this prayer:
Give to your people, O God, grace to hear and keep your word, that, after the example of your servant, William Tyndale, we may not only profess your gospel, but also be ready to suffer and die for it, to the honour of your name; through Jesus Christ our Lord. AMEN!
We had some other chapel folk join us for the end.
On our coming Mary Jones walk we will be reflecting upon Psalm 119.
Judah and Tamar
Recently in our chronological Bible reading we came across one of the most difficult and seemingly incomprehensible passages in Scripture. Sadly, I preached on Genesis 37 and not 38 (where this story is found) and so we missed the opportunity to explore its riches. A friend of mine, however, from Walsh Baptist Church, Ontario, Canada, recently wrote an article on the chapter and I felt it was such a good exposition that I asked for permission to share it with folks here in Cromhall:
Judah And Tamar – Unravelling One Of The Strangest Chapters In All Of Holy Scripture
What is this story doing in my Bible?! That’s probably the reaction you first had when you came across the story of Judah and Tamar. It won’t be the last story that makes you ask that question. As we read the Bible we need to remember that Old Testament narrative is not ‘prescriptive’, but ‘descriptive’. We aren’t hearing a story that is telling us how we should act, rather we are hearing a story telling us about what really happened, and revealing how God acted towards the characters in the story. Sometimes we get a close account of God’s justice or mercy; sometimes we get the long view that requires entire chapters to go by before the picture emerges. Keep in mind, however, that God is the hero of the story of the Bible. It is the story of how God is redeeming for himself a people; delivering them from their sin and sanctifying them for himself. The amazing thing is that God often redeems some very wretched people.
Judah is one of those wretches. The story of Judah and Tamar in Genesis 38 might be one of the strangest stories in all of Holy Scripture. At first glance it is equal parts offensive and inscrutable but on closer inspection it yields many useful insights into the character of God, the nature of sin and the hope of our redemption. The story unfolds in distinct scenes or stages:
Scene 1 – Judah’s Character on Display
In scene 1 we become acquainted with the main character, humanly speaking, in this unusual narrative. Judah is the fourth born son of Leah, the unloved wife of Jacob. What did he learn as a child, before his father Jacob had been converted at the Jabbok? He had seen his father play favourites between his wives; he had seen his mother and her sister manipulate his father with sexual seduction. Judah grows up in a very dysfunctional family.
Over the past 17 years he had seen his half-brother Joseph favoured over all his siblings. So great is his disdain for his brother that he conspires with his brothers to kill him when they see him coming to meet them in the fields. It is only the voice of his older brother Reuben that stays their hand and they throw him down a dry well. Judah is a wicked man.
Then we hear Judah’s voice. “Let’s sell him.” Looking out over the fields he saw a group of slave traders headed for Egypt, and so he pulls him out of the pit and sells him for 20 shekels of silver. Clearly, Judah is a wicked man.
Then, to cover their guilt, the brothers kill a goat and dip Joseph’s robe into the blood and present it to their father with the question: Please identify the owner of this robe? (Don’t forget that line – it makes another appearance in the story before us.) With that lie, a blood dipped coat of many colours, Judah and his brothers break their father’s heart with a lie. I don’t need to say it again, but I will, Judah is a wicked man.
It is not accident that this story about Judah interrupts the story about Joseph, the two are tied together. After selling his brother into slavery Jacob separates himself for a time from his brothers, he makes a poor friend – Hirah, the Addullamite – a Canaanite and moves into another part of Canaan. Abraham wouldn’t have a Canaanite wife for Isaac; Isaac wouldn’t take a Canaanite wife for Jacob and mourned that Esau had married a Canaanite. But Judah thinks nothing of taking a Canaanite woman for his wife. We never learn her name – just that she was the daughter of Shua.
She bears him 3 sons: Er, Onan and Shelah.
And they fall not far from the tree. They have a ruthless, wicked, brother-selling; father-deceiving dad – and the Bible simply tells us that they were wicked. So wicked that God doesn’t allow the first two to live, but puts them to death.
Scene 2 – Tamar Deprived of Justice
Into our story enters a young Canaanite woman. Her name is Tamar and Tamar means ‘Palm Tree’. It is Judah who arranges the marriage on behalf of his son Er. I expect her father gave a dowry to the newly married couple and they began life together. Tamar and Er – a wicked man, the son of a wicked man. We know nothing of their relationship, in what way was Er wicked? Did he take out his wickedness on his new wife? Did he beat her? Did he insult and belittle her? Did Tamar suffer? She suffered in at least one way. Her husband died and left her a widow without children.
This was one of the worst situations a woman could find herself in in the Ancient world of Canaan. No social security, no welfare, no safety-net, no poor homes or nursing homes for the aged. A woman was dependent upon her children to support her and care for her in her old age.
No one wanted to be saddled with a widow to support.
So the law codes of the ancient world stated that the next brother in line was to take her as his own wife and ensure that she had children so that his BROTHER’S line would continue.
So Onan is called upon to PERFORM THE DUTY OF A BROTHER-IN-LAW TO HER, AND RAISE UP OFFSPRING FOR YOUR BROTHER.
But the calculations in Onan’s mind show him that if Tamar ever has a child, it will reduce his fortunes. You see, with Er out of the way, Onan stands to inherit the share of the first born – half of all that his Father owns – not the ¼ share that would come to him if Er had lived. But if Tamar has a son, that son will be considered the son of Er, not Onan and so the first born child of Tamar would stand in line before his father to inherit the larger share.
So we have this terrible verse in the Bible. But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. (Gen 38:9)
Onan is willing to treat Tamar like an object of pleasure – but not as a person to whom justice is due.
This is oppression. He is oppressing his sister in law. She is legally bound to him and his family. She has no recourse to go elsewhere – but instead of giving her a hope and a future, he simply uses and abuses her and leaves her childless.
God sees it. God deals with it. God kills Onan because he is wicked.
And now one son remains to Judah – and he has no heirs from Tamar. His sons are dead because of their own wickedness – but Judah begins to look at Tamar like she might be the cause.
So he sends her home to her father to wait until his youngest son was old enough to marry. And so Tamar is asked to put her life on hold. She is still bound to Judah’s family – she is now considered the BETROTHED wife of Shelah – but she must wait, living in widows weeds in her father’s home.
And time goes by.
Weeks, months, years?
Judah does not send for her. Shelah does not inquire. She has been forgotten – cast aside. Bound to a man who will never give her children.
Then word reaches her that Judah’s wife has died; he has completed his time of mourning and is planning to go up to Timnah for sheep-shearing.
Scene 3 – Tamar and Judah’s Shame
In Scene 3 a plot hatches in the mind of Tamar.
In Canaan sheep shearing was a famous time for debauchery. It would not be helpful for your personal sanctification to know the details of the Canaanite rituals, for I cannot erase what I know and wish I didn’t. But suffice to say that Canaanites worshipped their idols through ‘cult prostitutes’.
So Tamar lays aside her widow’s clothing; and puts on the veil of a prostitute and sat by the side of the road waiting for her father-in-law.
There is intent here. She is not simply playing prostitute for any man – she is lying in wait for Judah. (What does it tell you about that man’s character, that this woman set out IN THIS WAY to entrap him?)
It works, Judah sees a young prostitute and makes her a proposition. (Remember, this is a wicked man we’re dealing with – at every turn he confirms it.) He will pay her a goat for her services – and in pledge until the goat arrives, he surrenders his SEAL and STAFF – not unlike handing over his credit card and driver’s license. These are unique items that identify a specific owner.
The deed is done. Tamar is pregnant by her father-in-law and Judah is stumped as to where his seal and staff have gone.
He sends back the promised goat with his wicked friend Hiram only to find that the village-folk don’t know of any cult prostitute that plies her trade in that area.
‘She’s gone… I don’t know where she went. Do you want me to put up a wanted poster?’ I imagine that’s the sort of ribald jesting Judah heard from his wicked friend.
“No, of course not,” Judah isn’t ashamed of his sin, he’s ashamed he was taken advantage of and let some harlot escape with such important items. But he’s not going to open himself to open ridicule by making the fact known to the whole community.
“Let her have them… at least my respectability is intact.” That’s the sentiment we get from the passage.
Scene 4 – Judah’s Hypocrisy and Tamar’s Fate
Three months pass. And word reaches Judah that Tamar has played the harlot and is pregnant.
Now – get this straight – the fury of Judah is not against Tamar as the widow of his first two sons. His claim against her – the accusation that is being leveled, is that she has committed adultery against Shelah – his youngest son, to whom she is now betrothed IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT JUDAH KNOWS THAT THERE WILL NEVER BE A WEDDING FOR THOSE TWO.
His wrath is that the name of his family has been brought into disrespect and dishonor. People are going to be talking behind his back. He’ll be a laughing stock.
So he sets out to settle the score. (I wonder if he is secretly delighted at the thought of getting rid of this woman ‘legally’.)
“Bring her out and let her be burned.”
The crowd has gathered, the wood is being stacked up. The rumour mill is churning. But before the Tamar emerges for her last walk to the pyre she sends out a bundle and asks Judah the question he had once asked his father:
“Please identify whose these are. By this man I am pregnant.”
It’s not hard to figure out who they belong to.
Scene 5 – Repentance and Conversion
And in that moment something shifts. Judah IS guilty. But he finally sees it, his eyes are open and he recognizes at last his own guilt.
He is guilty of depriving Tamar of justice by keeping his son from her.
He is guilty of impregnating his daughter-in-law.
He is guilty of gross hypocrisy – for he was ready to put her to death for the very sins that he was guilty of.
And this is not just a sense of public embarrassment. This is genuine repentance that goes right to the heart. She is going to be the mother of twin boys – both counted as the children and heirs of Judah – but he will never again lay a hand upon Tamar.
Judah not only repents, his repentance is real, his heart is converted. Jump forward 15 years. The ruthless, merciless Judah is nowhere to be found. Knowing that the only way that food can be purchased for the extended family is to bring his youngest brother to Egypt he offers his own life as surety.
And Judah said to Israel his father, “Send the boy with me, and we will arise and go, that we may live and not die, both we and you and also our little ones. I will be a pledge of his safety. From my hand you shall require him. If I do not bring him back to you and set him before you, then let me bear the blame forever. If we had not delayed, we would now have returned twice.” (Genesis 43:8-10 ESV)
Of course – the man at the other end is Joseph, the brother Judah once sold to slave traders. Judah doesn’t know who he is – but when Joseph threatens to arrest Benjamin we see a very changed Judah – he now pleads for his brothers life and offers his own life in pledge for his brothers. From whence came this enormous change in heart – it would seem that the story of Judah and Tamar was the point of conversion in the heart of Judah.
“Now therefore, as soon as I come to your servant my father, and the boy is not with us, then, as his life is bound up in the boy’s life, as soon as he sees that the boy is not with us, he will die, and your servants will bring down the gray hairs of your servant our father with sorrow to Sheol. For your servant became a pledge of safety for the boy to my father, saying, ‘If I do not bring him back to you, then I shall bear the blame before my father all my life.’ Now therefore, please let your servant remain instead of the boy as a servant to my lord, and let the boy go back with his brothers. For how can I go back to my father if the boy is not with me? I fear to see the evil that would find my father.” (Genesis 44:30-34 ESV)
We see in the story of Judah and Tamar the scandal of grace. Their child, Perez, will be part of the genetic chain the results in the birth of Christ. It isn’t until we come to Christ and his atoning sacrifice that we can fully understand the scope of God’s grace. So deep, so complete will be the sacrifice of the Saviour that no sin stands outside of his ability to forgive.
There are sins that the world is never willing to forgive. The world sets an eternal condemnation against actions such as Tamar and Judah – but if you could only know how dark and twisted are the lives of the people you meet everyday, you would understand why God records this story for posterity.
A Saviour who can only redeem people from petty theft, lying on their taxes and thinking impure thoughts isn’t going nearly deep enough to redeem lost humanity.
The entry of God’s Son into the world is good news for those living under the guilt of grievous sin. His grace is sufficient to atone for every sin. Even an incestuous relationship between Tamar and Judah.
The result of embracing his gracious forgiveness is NOT license – but conversion. The natural consequences in this life may remain. The one who has always been tempted by certain sins will do well to set a great deal of distance between himself and his temptation – but we trust that God’s grace is sufficient to transform the most wretched sinner.
SDG
Marc Bertrand
[originally written on Feb 5, 2016 for adfontes.ca]
Have we not been here before?
Have we not been here before? Comparing 17th Century Persecution of Protestant Dissenters and the Looming Ofsted Debacle Facing 21st Century British Christianity
I recently had a conversation with a fellow brother in Christ about my concerns surrounding new and proposed powers for Ofsted regarding Fundamental British Values and the Prevent Duty (extremism). In response to a comment I made about this he asked, “I am interested to know what parallels you see between government response to extremism between 1662 and 1689 and our own times [i.e. Ofsted].” In answering this I will primarily be focusing on Christians but will seek to engage with other worldviews as far as I am able. This is a huge issue and I apologize in advance to anyone who recognizes I have not perhaps covered everything.
*To adequately respond to this I had to break my own rule of blogging brevity.
Let us take a journey back in time to 17th Century England. Beginning with the restoration of the monarchy in 1660 came an aim, driven by the partnership of both the church (the Church of England) and the State, to root out all “radicals” who had upset the country during the civil war and Commonwealth period. Similarly in the 18th Century when the Evangelical Revival began (which was really a revived attempt at reformation and spiritual renewal begun the previous century) Bishop Warburton (1698-1779) critiqued the movement labelling it that “old puritan fanaticism revived.”[1]
Churchmen and traditionalists viewed the Puritan aims to reform the state, church and society to be more in line with God’s word as fanatics, and Puritans viewed the traditionalists as traitors for having moved so far away from what God’s Word said regarding a Christian England. The seventeenth century is best understood as a clash of worldviews.
Speaking of the restoration of the monarchy, the puritan Richard Baxter (1615-91) lamented in 1665 that, “Never were such fair opportunities to sanctifie a Nation, lost and trodden underfoot, as have been in this Land of Late!” He continued that had it not “been for these Impediments, England had been like in a quarter of an Age to have become a Land of Saints, and a Pattern of Holiness to all the World, and the unmatchable Paradise of the Earth.” [2] Under the influence of Puritanism England had witnessed not only spiritual benefits but also other society advancements as well in areas such as literature, science, economics, education, etc.
Beginning in 1662, however, Parliament passed a series of laws known as the Conventicle Acts meant to supress Puritan views and enforce conformity to the religious and societal values of traditionalists. The laws were meant to crush dissent to a view that was at its centre informed by human wisdom rather than godly wisdom (Prov 3:5-8).[3] These acts sought to set the Book of Common Prayer (and its theology and forms of worship and church) as the national Christian standard. All ministers and public officials had to subscribe to them or face being ousted from their positions- in fact nearly 2000 ministers were ejected from their posts because of it, some of the ablest, most highly educated and most spiritual, to the detriment of society to be sure. Restrictions were also placed on how close these ministers could go to their old parishes. If one did not attend worship at the local parish church you would be fined. If you taught contrary to official church teaching you would be fined or imprisoned. To be able to worship outside of this regiment required a licence granted by the bishop (if it was indeed granted). Those who dissented were also barred from holding public office which in extreme instances went so far as to those whom government office bought their milk and firewood from.
Dissenters were systematically persecuted and driven to the edges of society, which meant the loss of some of the leading, brightest and loyal citizens of the realm. The end result? Far from ridding the country of such conscientious and Biblical examples the number of Dissenters (now organized as Independents or Congregationalists, Presbyterians, Baptists, etc) actually grew! Thankfully the government came to realize that conformity over man’s heart through power is impossible and was in fact counterproductive to their aims. The Dissenters fought for toleration so that we might have the freedom of religion we have today (we will come back to their understanding of that tolerance in a moment).
First, fast forward to the 21st Century and it doesn’t take much to realize that things have changed, but also to see that there is nothing new under the sun. Have we not been here before? We no longer live in the England of 350 years ago, however, there are some similarities. Through the state control of education (instead of by means of the church) the government is seeking to enforce conformity to a secular pluralistic [traditionalist] post-modern worldview to the exclusion of other views that oppose it. It is seeking to force opposing views (particularly religious) to conform to its agenda or face punishment. It is a clash of worldviews, but with one difference- the undoing of the hard won freedom of religious liberty. Historically the clash was regarding doctrine and matters of worship. Today it will often be ethical and surround truth claims.
| Then and Now Parallels | ||
| Issue | Then | Now |
| Societal Shift | Reformation/Puritanism-Restoration | A Christian UK- post-modern multi-faith, multi-cultural secular pluralism |
| Clash of worldviews | Puritan-Traditionalist | Secular Pluralism- Christianity and other Dissenting Voices |
| Alliance (the winners) | State-Established Church | State- Secularism |
| Driving Force | The intolerance of a State Church | The intolerance of tolerance |
| The losers | Dissenting Protestant Christians | Authentic Christians and other Dissenting Voices |
| Those targeted | Everyone but especially pastors and civil officials | (Thinking primarily of Christians) Everyone but especially Christian pastors and leaders, civil servants (nurses, teachers, registrars), parents |
| Options | Conform or else | Conform or else |
| Outcome | Persecution | Persecution |
From here on out I want to address a couple of matters like what is tolerance?, what is extremism?, how can societal freedoms be protected?, how can an increasingly polarized society coexist?, and what Christians should be preparing for if it is not.
But first I want to expose you to the reality of what Ofsted is being asked to promote in regards to Fundamental British Values and Extremism. The following examples come from Christian teachers who have sat in on Ofsted training.
- In terms of Religious Education (that is to say religious schools):
- Even if we ourselves have personal faith/beliefs that are contrary to what we have to teach we must remain neutral
- E.g. Catholic schools must teach about homosexuality being an orientation and normal although Catholic schools put up a fuss that this goes against their beliefs—they are not being respectful or tolerant
- Even if we ourselves have personal faith/beliefs that are contrary to what we have to teach we must remain neutral
- To be on the lookout because extremism comes in many different forms:
- Ex. Need to look out for/ be aware of not just extremist/fundamentalist Muslims but also fundamentalist Christians
- Watch out for “my God is better than your God.”[4]
- Statement: Although Christianity may have traditionally been the religion of the state we are a multi-cultural, multi-faith country who need to accept and include people of all faiths and cultures
- Religious Education classes in Church of England Schools may still be held as normal but must present the “norms” without being prejudicial (e.g. on matters pertaining to abortion, homosexuality as they are part of the “rule of law” and “individual liberty” so therefore cannot be presented negatively).[5]
There is a lot in these short examples. I will do my best to address many of the matters raised as we look at the following questions:
What is tolerance?
Tolerance has come to mean something much different than the word originally meant. Today tolerance means accepting what others believe as equally valid and even embracing and celebrating them as one’s own. The change in meaning of this word must be seen within the wider cultural shift to post-modernity that sceptically denies that there is one grand meta-narrative that explains life.
Historically tolerance arose (largely as a concept championed by the Baptist and Mennonite traditions) by recognizing that while two people (or groups) may fundamentally disagree or be diametrically opposed to one another, it is not in either sides interest to kill one another, and so out of respect for the other grounded in the Christian teaching that we are all created in the image of God, it pledged to respect the other though they may fundamentally disagree; this was to be reciprocal.
To put it another way: I disagree with you (and believe that without faith in Christ you are eternally lost), but I respect your right to worship whatever god or non-god you choose. Increasingly, however, tolerance is taking on a slightly different connotation in the 21st century. Pluralists want to say that there is no correct position (of course, the irony is that pluralists won’t tolerate those who disagree!, thus making it self-evident that they in fact do believe in a meta-narrative—their own).
That brings up the intolerance of the modern usage of the word because the “tolerant” will not tolerate any competing, let alone exclusive, truth claims. This is what Timothy Keller writes of in his book The Intolerance of Tolerance.
If an historic usage of the word tolerance is not recovered than those who hold exclusivist views other than the majority can reasonably expect to be persecuted. Will common sense be restored?
What is extremism and fundamentalism?
Extremism is measured from ones distance from an accepted norm. It is therefore a relative term. It also has different usages ranging from radical, unusual, or even trendy or intense (think of a teenager saying, “that’s extreme!).”
Christianity didn’t used to be extreme when it was the norm. Now that it is not the norm and is not seen as fitting within the norm (because of its exclusive truth claims) it is seen as extreme. However, one needs to recognize that it is society that has moved, not Christianity. So from a Christian point of view Christianity is normal and secular pluralists are extreme (here I cannot see some humour in the term fundamental British values). Each group could also easily see the other as fundamentalist, ardently holding onto their convictions.
I suppose the true sense of a fundamentalist is when they cease to be people of ardent conviction and become militant and angry and attempt to force others to adhere to their beliefs and worldview.
Here we need to distinguish between lumping Islam and Christianity together. While Christians may disagree with someone because it is a religion seasoned with grace, love and respect there is a reason why authentic Christianity does not have militant versions. We need to seriously ask why “fundamentalist” [read authentic] Christianity does not breed the sort of radicalism we see in Islam? While Christianity may hold differing views than society and perhaps be viewed as extreme in this regard Christianity is not a fundamentalist or militant threat to the state or society but represents some of its most loyal, honest and faithful citizens (Ro 13:1-7, 1 Pet 2:13).
Praise item: It is encouraging to know that some Christian teachers are being chosen to teach about Ofsted’s Fundamental British Values and Prevent Duty by their schools because they are sensible, loving, and all round good people. May they add sobriety to this debacle! Indeed many Christians find themselves placed by the Lord in positions in which they can advocate for the Church as ambassadors of Christ.
How can societal freedoms be protected?
*In the next two sections I hope to reasonably convince, however, even more so to stir us to further reflection upon these points.
Western society was built on Christianity. From this came principles of liberty such as the freedom of religion, the freedom of speech and numerous individual liberties. Within a Christian context I can think of few Christians who would not have affirmed these as anything but positive. But religious liberty when not used to protect God given laws becomes a licentious means through which the chief sin of pride rears its ugly head. Many modern [and good] freedoms have been perverted along these lines.[6]
It has to be recognized that these freedoms were established at a time when most people were Judeo-Christian, and even if they were not societal values and norms were based around a Judeo-Christian framework. The Judeo-Christian tradition formed the lowest common denominator fabric of society. Even if not all people worshipped, the moral fibre of society was jointly affirmed. In a post-Christian Britain we have lowered the lowest common denominator to such a point (and based on a faulty post-modern worldview) that we are not sure what it is. What is it that holds us together socially? What knits us together? We say it is “freedom” and that every view is equal but then become afraid of Islam (and other exclusivist claims) but do not really have any right to say they, or any other view, are wrong if we hold to a post-modern pluralist view.
In this setting as a Christian I want, for example, to affirm the right to worship freely (because I would want the same and know an atheist cannot be forced to worship) but immediately find the contradiction in this affirmation in that I’m not overly found of Satanists believing them to be less than helpful to society (acknowledging too that 20th century atheism was a destructive force as well). I am also not in favour of giving religions freedom whose central tenant is animal or human sacrifice. So “freedom” historically had its limits. What about today? Still today we have laws that exclude murder and polygamy and bestiality. Still today, though our pluralism denies it, there are things we know to be right and wrong (in part because God has given us consciences, Ro 2:15, though even they can become tainted). But what if these things you or I found to be wrong were found to infringe upon someone’s secular-pluralist rights? Rights either must have some limits or it is a free for all (which is the trajectory we have largely set for ourselves), we must ask ourselves how freedoms developed in a different era be adequately applied in a new one that may not easily mix with them.
As society becomes polarized [“multi”] how can I affirm the right to the freedom of worship, practice, etc, of someone I do not view as helpful (for example I want to affirm a militant Muslim’s freedom of speech but sense that such belief and promotion of it may lead to behaviour that causes bodily harm). Post-Christendom no longer has the parameters to adequately address many of the issue we are facing. So, much like the communist who realizes communism does work but still celebrates communism anyway, secular pluralism that championed diversity and freedom is now realizing just how difficult that is realistically to maintain. So it has begun to impose its views while still propagandizing that it is about diversity.
How can an increasingly polarized society coexist peaceably?
There is great difficulty in the government protecting people’s rights of freedom and balancing matters of justice, when society is made up of various truth claims and value systems. How can these coexist peaceably? How can fair treatment be maintained in a society that is now post-Christian and in many respects so multi it is no longer cohesive?
Aside from a revival that would see us return to the sensibilities of our Christian heritage I can only see one option that would avoid conflict and protect “freedom” and preserve societal cohesiveness that would see us avoid total anarchy. In a free for all society, to govern fairly within the historic notion of freedom, the government would have to (even if subscribing to or promoting a secular-pluralist worldview) allow dissenting views so long as they do not harm anyone, but not only allow them but protect them (much as many governments did with conscientious objectors [pacifists] during WWI and WWII). Where an individual or group found to be dissenting from the prevailing secular-pluralist society such dissent would need to be permitted to opt out of the prevailing worldview so long as this did not cause serious bodily harm. This is truly the lowest common denominator I can foresee.
Even if different expressions of worldview and religion may appear extreme, while we may not agree with them, we must respect that them if we are to subsist in a society in which “freedom” in a post-Christian sense is still heralded though I personally do not believe this is the best vision for society because I believe that reason behoves us to have a society (and for the government in performing its God given responsibility to enact just God fearing laws) built around the acknowledgement of the supremacy of God and his ways rather than to foolishly oppose Him and them (righteousness exalts a nation but sin is a reproach to any people, Prov 14:34).
What Christians should be preparing for if the above is not possible (i.e. that persecution finds us)?
First, regardless what happens, we must show our highest allegiance to Christ by considering not what others will think of us but in honouring Him (Jn 12:42-43). That Jesus is Lord is the central confession of the Church.
Second, we need to have a hearty trust in the sovereignty of God, regardless of what happens (Mt 6:25-34). May this spur us on to be better and bolder ambassadors (Eph 6:18-19).
Thirdly, Christians need to be praying for sense to prevail. We need to pray for our governments that they might recognize the heritage of this land and protect Christians so that they can live and worship in peace, recognizing us as trustworthy citizens who simply want to enjoy the freedom to live and worship.
Pray for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life. (1 Tim 2:1-2).
Fourthly, we must always remember to love our persecutors (Mt 5:43-47), showing them compassion (Mt 9:36) for having no saving knowledge of the truth in order that they may indeed be lead to the truth.
Fifthly, we need to be prepared (1 Pet 3:15b). How well do we know the reason for the hope that we have? Could we defend the faith, do we know what we believe and why? Today there is no room for uninformed Christians. The Puritans and Dissenters give us an example of not only how to live out one’s faith under fire but they also serve as a source of developing theological robustness, so like Paul before Agrippa (Acts 25:13-27) we might give our defence to Christ’ honour and for others benefit. In so doing we will have the delight to know our God better!
Sixthly, as persecution mounts we will soon discover whose faith is genuine and whose is fickle. Many so called Christians will continue to conform to societal pressures and disgrace their profession. Soon we will see any remaining distinctions made clear between the wheat and the tares (Mt 13:36-43). I believe the Lord is finishing pruning His Church in the UK of dead and unhelpful branches (Job 14:7-9). We may indeed be entering upon this final phase, after which I believe we shall see what many have been longing for, genuine revival in the face of godlessness and the Church bearing much fruit. The blood [or suffering] of the martyrs is the seed of the Church.
Seventhly, we need to recognize the spiritual nature of our present struggle (Eph 6:12)
Lastly we need to remember the privilege and blessing in Jesus words: Blessed [happy] are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account. (Mt 5:11). Those NT passages on persecution that were so relevant for the early Church will become life giving promises for the Church of today once again.
Possible Scenarios
Let me paint a possible picture of what the future could look like for Christians in the UK…
Imagine the following scenario. (If you don’t think it could happen, let me remind you that neither would many other Christians who have found themselves in similar societal situations in recent years or throughout history more generally).
Secular pluralism continues to grow as a worldview and as a force within society. Gradually the intolerance of the “tolerant” reaches a breaking point where exclusivist claims rub their own exclusivist claim the wrong way and there is backlash.
Now, Western society prides itself too much in liberty and freedom to openly persecute as such. Open persecution is what intolerant non-Western countries do. Yes, we are too priggish for that so it will come in more subtle ways, but come it will. Laws that seek to entrench secular pluralism and re-write societal norms and values like we are already seeing in OFSTED will by their very nature exclude and target those who do not conform (i.e. Christians).
Already with Ofsted, and given more time, Christian teachers who do not conform will be faced with losing their jobs (or worse, fines). Christian schools that do not conform may be shut down. Christian parents may be reprimanded for teaching or handling their children in a Christian manner, and in the worst case scenario have them taken by the co-parenting mentality of the state, viewing their parents as harmful to the child’s development. Christian employees may face discrimination and job loss. Christian businesses or employers (we have already seen this, i.e. the Christian baker and hotel owners who were shut down re: their views on marriage). Christian civil servants (especially thinking of registrars or those tasked with the responsibility of enforcing new norms) will lose their jobs or be forced to conscientiously step down. Worse of all would be the government requiring of employees to sign documents subscribing to “Fundamental British Values” to gain or maintain work. Loyal Christians with half a conscience would be forced to go elsewhere (maybe even moving internationally). While at this point much government control is seeking to use education and the safeguarding of children to filter extremism and promote the new norm, there may come a time when such censorship targets churches. A preacher who teaches contrary to a state law (i.e. sexual orientation), even in a non-hateful compassionate way (which is how sinners should be treated, remembering that it is by grace we were saved,1 Cor 6:11), could risk fines, rehabilitation or imprisonment. A church that puts up a fuss to such intervention robbed of its charitable status, taxed, or forced to close and move underground because of its “extremist” threat. God forbid that these should happen, and thank the Lord for where sense has prevailed, but it doesn’t take much of a stretch to see these warnings realized, as indeed some already have been.
Choose this day whom you will serve!
But as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD (Jos 24:15)
May we remain steadfast in the Lord,
In His strength
Pastor Chris
[1] Watts, Dissenters, I, 436.
[2] Reliquiae Baxterianae, ed M. Sylvester (London, 1696), first pagination 96f.
[3] These are all of course generalization and argued from a view that is unsympathetic to the traditionalist agenda of the period.
[4] While Christianity is exclusivist by nature of God’s own claims, and therefore I agree with this sentiment, as a statement (assuming how it could be said in pride), I disagree as while Christians hold our God to be the only true God and Jesus as the only way to Him, we must do so in humble confidence and not arrogant pride.
[5] While Christians ardently support the rule of law (1 Pet 2:13) we cannot in good conscience do so when earthly laws violate God’s laws (Mark 12:13-17; Acts 5:29).
[6] We fail to realize that we are slaves to sin and sin finds its greatest expression in our pride. Liberty comes when we cease to be slaves to sin and becomes slaves to Christ (Ro 6:18).
The Brilliance of God
This past Lord’s Day evening we looked at Abraham and the Covenant of Circumcision. What a rich passage! While I sought to cover many of the angles one point that I passed over had to do with circumcision being commanded for new babies on the 8th day. A former nurse in the congregation stressed that for her that was very important as it highlighted the brilliance of God.
Certainly God is brilliant. He is all-knowing (omniscient). Job 31:4 reminds us of this when it says:
Does He not see my ways, and number all my steps?
But why did the LORD in His brilliance command Abraham to circumcise infants on the 8th day, why not the 5th or 7th or 10th?
Before we get to the symbolism, the brilliance of God is displayed in this simple and seemingly mundane command, in that on the 8th day new-born levels of vitamin K peak. Why is that important? Vitamin K helps the blood to clot, an important and necessary factor when undertaking a circumcision in an infant so young. While Abraham did not know about vitamin K, in His brilliance God did, and as such commanded the sign of the covenant to be given on the 8th day. But like many things in the Old Testament, and since this was a sign after all, what symbolism did God intend by the giving of this sign on the 8th day (for symbolism of the sign itself see the sermon)?
Not all Jews agree as to any spiritual or philosophical meaning of the 8th day. Some merely stress duty. One Rabbinic blogger noted that 7 signifies what is natural and finite (ex. 7 days of creation or 7 days a week). He suggested 8 represents the super-natural nature of the covenant, the incomprehensibility of it, and the miraculous of the grace in it (I read grace into it as he didn’t use this word). He said:
And so, a baby is given is brit [circumcision] on the eighth day. He is entering a religion founded upon faith, whose survival is miraculous, and whose potential in the world is infinite.
While much of the above would make sense symbolically to the Christian; Christianity has often seen much more at work them mere symbolism but also prophecy.
The early Church Father Augustine wrote this:
[Christ] suffered voluntarily, and so could choose His own time for suffering and for resurrection, He brought it about that His body rested from all its works on Sabbath in the tomb, and that His resurrection on the third day, which we call the Lord’s day, the day after the Sabbath, and therefore the eighth, proved the circumcision of the eighth day to be also prophetical of Him.
Following this view the 8th day was an early prophecy about the Christ which was the fulfilment of this promise and whose Resurrection took place on the 8th day. John Calvin, while more reticent than Augustine seems to concur with this redemptive-historical approach to the 8th day in his commentary on Genesis 17:12:
Augustine also thinks that it had reference to the resurrection of Christ; whereby external circumcision was abolished and the truth of the figure was set forth. It is probable and consonant with reason, that the number seven designated the course of the present life. Therefore the eighth day might seem to be fixed upon by the Lord, to prefigure the beginning of a new life. But because such a reason is never given in Scripture, I dare affirm nothing. Wherefore, let it suffice to maintain what is certain and solid; namely, that God, in this symbol, has so represented the destruction of the old man, as yet to show that he restores men to life.
So be it a prophecy about Christ, the change of the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday (the Lord’s Day), emphasis on the new creation or grace found in the covenant, it appears along with medical reasons that the 8th day affirms the brilliance of God.
The Lord’s Sweetest Blessings,
Pastor Chris
The eternal question…
Several weeks ago I was asked a very good question by a older child. Wanting to encourage them in the Faith I took this opportunity to reply to their question by sending them this letter:
Dear Sally,
Happy New Year!
Your grandmother passed along a question that you had about God. As I love talking to people about the Lord and helping us all to know Him better it always excites me when people like yourself ask a really good question. Asking good questions about God is one important way of how we can come to know Him more deeply. So before I begin I just wanted to encourage you to continue to seek God out and ask good questions about who He is, what it means to know Him and be able to do what pleases Him; and most of all, how we can be saved from our sins through Jesus.
So I would like to respond to your question, “Why has God always been?”, and I hope it answers (or begins to answer) your question.
The Bible often says that God has always existed. Sometimes it uses the word “eternal” or “eternity” to show this characteristic of God. Eternal simply means God has existed forever.
Psalm 90:2 tells us that “from everlasting to everlasting you are God.” Many other Bible verses say the same type of thing (ex. Genesis 1:1, 21:23; Psalm 103:17; Isaiah 57:15; Hebrews 2:10, 13:8; Revelation 4:11).
Some of God’s characteristics we can share. For example, God is love and so we can love one another, or, God is truth and so we should not lie. However, some characteristics of God we cannot share. His eternity is one of them. We began to exist the moment we started to grow in our mother’s tummy. God is eternal. He has always existed and will always exist. It is one of His amazing characteristics! We can see this in the story of the burning bush. God appeared to Moses in the form of a bush that burned but was not burnt up. He wanted Moses to go and tell the King of Egypt to let His people the Israelites go free. Moses asked God, “if they ask, who shall I tell them sent me?” God told Moses to say that I AM sent you (Exodus 3:14). God’s name shows us that He is eternal. He was, He is and He will be. He has always existed in the past and will always exist in the future!
Now since you are a smart girl, you have probably already noticed, this does not completely answer your question. The truth is that no one fully knows how God has always been. Some things God keeps as a mystery to remind us that we are only human and that He is God. One thing that we can be sure of, though, is that God has told us He is eternal. In the Bible God has told us everything He wants us to know about Him. There is a small poem that I memorized when I was very young. It says, “O God, your sea is so great, and my boat is so small!” The hard part in answering your question, after saying that God is eternal, is that you and I are so small. We are just a small part of everything that God has created. Because we are small and God is great we will never know everything about Him. But we can be thankful that He has told us about His greatness in the Bible because He loves us. Because of this I believe the best answer is that we should be happy with what He has shared with us. What God has told us in the Bible is true and when we come to believe this, then we are able to trust Him with the mysteries He has not shared.
Think of it this way. There are many things you do not know or do not know how to do yet. When you need to know something your parents lovingly tell you and help you so that you will grow up into a beautiful and intelligent young lady. They know so much more than you do because they are older and experienced. It is like that with God. He is our heavenly Father and He doesn’t tell us everything but what He does tell us is for our good so we might become the people He wants us to be.
God is eternal. From everlasting to everlasting He is our Creator, Rescuer and Friend. We can trust this because the Bible is true. We accept it in faith, which means we trust in God.
To help you praise God because of His eternity, I would encourage you to ask your parents to listen to these three songs on the internet:
Everlasting God by Chris Tomlin
Everlasting to Everlasting by Brian Doerksen
Immortal, Invisible
The Lord’s Sweetest Blessings, Your Friend,
Pastor Chris
Morning by Morning
As I cycled into chapel this morning, a routine I regularly look forward to, I was delighted to feel the brisk English morning rush against my face and sense the sunshine beaming down (November and December were mostly rainy with a village in Wales counting 81 straight days of it). This morning, however, was -1 degrees Celsius. It was absolutely refreshing, even if my eye lashes froze, at least to a Canadian living in the land of the warm. The sun shone down across the fields glistening with the morning frost. What could be more beautiful?
![20160119_092318[1]](https://cromhallchapel.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/20160119_0923181.jpg?w=1040)
[the field beside Cromhall Chapel]
I was reminded of the lyrics from the refrain of an old hymn:
“Great is Thy faithfulness!” “Great is Thy faithfulness!” Morning by morning new mercies I see; All I have needed Thy hand hath provided— “Great is Thy faithfulness,” Lord, unto me!
Those words are taken from Lamentations 2:22-24:
The steadfast love of the LORD never ceases;
His mercies never come to an end;
They are new every morning;
Great is your faithfulness.
“The LORD is my portion,” says my soul, “therefore I will hope in Him.”
What fantastic truths! I do not know what you woke up to today or what awaits us throughout the coming hours but I do know this. As we hope in Him, the LORD’s faithfulness is behind us, beside us and before us and so we can go confidently into this new day trusting He will be our portion.
The Lord’s Sweetest Blessings,
Pastor Chris
Why is the Apocrypha not part of the Bible?
As we began our 2016 focus on the Bible this year, twice already, I have emphasized that we believe, or said that the Bible only consists of, 66 books.
Our FIEC statement of faith says: God has revealed himself in the Bible, which consists of the Old and New Testaments alone.
An older chapel confession of faith emphasised this same fact more explicitly. The Westminster Confession, Chapter 1.2 titled “The Holy Scriptures” states:
Under the name of Holy Scripture, or the Word of God written, are now contained all the Books of the Old and New Testaments, which are these:
[after naming the 66 books that make up the Old and New Testaments it ends by saying]
All which are given by inspiration of God, to be the rule of faith and life.
Chapter1. 3 goes on to say:
The Books commonly called Apocrypha, not being of divine inspiration, are no part of the canon of the scripture; and therefore are of no authority in the Church of God, nor to be any otherwise approved, or made use of, than other human writings.
The apocrypha are books that appeared in history between the Old and New Testament. Discerning whether they are part of the canon of the Bible (that which the Church sees as from God and therefore beneficial and authoritative for His Church) is an important issue. For example the matter of purgatory can only be held by Roman Catholics because they appeal to one verse from the Apocrypha. Catholics endorsed the Apocrypha as canonical at the Council of Trent in 1546.
Evangelicals, however, while acknowledging the historical and literary values of these books (1 & 2 Esdras, Tobit, Judith, Additions to Esther, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, the Letter of Jeremiah, Song of the Three Holy Children, Susanna, Bel and the Dragon, the Prayer of Manasseh, and 1 & 2 Maccabees), have rejected them as canonical for the following basic reasons:
- They were never quoted by Jesus or the Apostles;
- Most of the Church Fathers regarded them as uninspired;
- They were not part of the Ancient Hebrew canon; and
- The inferior quality of most of the writings compared with the canonical books, mark them as unworthy of a place in Scripture.
What is canon becomes very important when we ask, what is truth?, in our post-modern age. Is it to be found in the Bible, the apocrypha, gnostic Gospels, other holy books, books of human wisdom, all of the above?
Where does the Lord want us to look for truth and where can we confidently know where to turn to be instructed in how to know Him and walk in His ways. The 66 books of the Bible, that is where, no more and no less.
If issues of why we believe the Bible are of importance you may want to click here for an additional resource.
The Lord’s Sweetest Blessings,
Pastor Chris
Open letter to our MP regarding extremism, British values, and concerns about religious freedom
Below is a letter the elders submitted to our local MP Luke Hall expressing our concern about current proposed legislation that we, along with many other UK Christians, believe will be harmful to the freedom of religion in the UK and may put Christians under great pressure. To read more information posted by the Christian Institute click here.
Luke Hall MP,
30 High Street,
Thornbury,
South Gloucestershire,
BS35 2AJ
Dear Mr. Luke Hall (MP for Thornbury and Yate)
As a local Christian chapel, concerned with the affairs of this nation, especially when discussing laws that will have a direct impact upon faith communities, we wanted to write to you, our MP, to express some concerns over proposed legislation dealing with granting OFSTED powers to censure faith communities for extremism and adherence to British values. While we support the need to deal with Islamic extremism, we wish to express some concerns as to this legislation that we hope you will take into consideration on our behalf as Parliament debates it. We are supportive of addressing root issues but not of seeking to combat them at superficial levels where the religious freedom that may be jeopardized may not be equal to the limited gains achieved.
Our first concern centres around the term “extremism” which is very subjective. Without a clearer definition, yourself or even ourselves, could easily be classed as an extremist if there is no objective standard by which to measure this. We are concerned that loyal Christian citizens may in time be targeted under this legislation as extremists, holding beliefs and values that are different from secular society when in fact respect for government lies at the heart of the Christian faith (Rom 13:1-7).
Our second concern is similar to the first and centres around the subjective nature of “British values.” The values that schools are being urged to promote as fundamental to British society include the value of democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty, and mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs. All these values and the many more that could have been included in such a list find their roots in our common Christian heritage as a country. While we support these at face value, because of the subjective nature of some of these terms and their changing definitions we have concerns that the very things we stand in favour of may be used against us as Christians. For example, Christians ardently support the rule of law (1 Pet 2:13) but cannot in good conscience do so when earthly laws violate God’s laws (Mark 12:13-17; Acts 5:29). Likewise we would want to affirm any wholesome rights of the individual but have reservations when individuals come to have rights above the group and also when so called “ individual rights” simply represent a justification for licentiousness rather than that which is good for the individual or society as a whole. Lastly, we recognize the wisdom in freedom of religion and stress that Christians seek to live in peace with their neighbours who may hold very different views (Matt 5:43-47). That said, Christians also believe that the claims of Jesus are exclusive, representing “the way, the truth and the life” (John 14:6). While we value tolerance in the traditional sense, we would not do so in the Post-Modern inclusivist sense, and would hope this would not jeopardize our support for British values.
Lastly is the matter of freedom of religion that seems to be at stake in this legislation. Is it necessary or even wise to police the religious beliefs of society through the means of government agents? We have peaceably existed as a chapel since 1813 and as Christians have been amongst successive governments most loyal citizens. We are all too aware of the State organized religious intolerance against Dissenters during the years 1662- 89. We pray the government will be discerning in bringing in new legislation so the State and Secularism do not enact similar laws to that of the seventeenth century.
Please be assured that we regularly keep her Majesty, Prime Minister David Cameron, his cabinet, this Parliament, and yourself in our chapel prayers (2 Tim 2:1-2).
Do not hesitate to contact us if you wish to dialogue further on this point.
Sincerely and with the warmest Christian blessings,
Mr. David Shawe,
on behalf of the Elders of the Cromhall Chapel:
Rev. Christopher W. Crocker
Gordon James
Eric Scolding
Tim Scolding
David Shawe
Cromhall Chapel 