Showing posts with label BBC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BBC. Show all posts

Tuesday, 12 March 2019

Book Introduction - BBC Brainwashing Britain




When devils will the blackest sins put on
They do suggest at first with heavenly shows

Othello, William Shakespeare 

Anyone spending time on social media these days can’t but help notice a growing mood of scepticism towards what is commonly known as the mainstream media, or MSM for short. The little people are frustrated. They feel cheated somehow, duped, disregarded, reviled even. The worms appear to be turning. Before the birth of the Internet the plebs took everything they heard from the MSM as the gospel truth they had little choice. And then along came the Internet –Facebook, Twitter et al. Things would never be the same again. Britain’s own lynchpin of all things mainstream, the BBC has found itself under scrutiny like never before. ‘Why should I as a licence payer,’ asked a social media user of BBC News one day, ‘have your biased reporting shoved down my throat?’ Strong stuff: ‘biased reporting’ is bad enough, but to be forcibly fed this stuff? There’s plenty more where that came from: ‘As for the BBC,’ notes a Disqus user, ‘I can't bring myself to bother watching anything they broadcast now every single thing they produce is an exercise in social engineering no matter the topic.’ And then there’s this: ‘Keep it up BBC. Watching you dig your own grave makes better viewing than 99% of the programmes you make.’ Another Disqus user summarises the situation thus: I never hardly watch anything from the BBC these days....it’s all total drivel. Even the 'comedy' is rubbish now.....it’s just not funny. And the News is always left-wing propaganda! And documentaries are usually ' historically inaccurate' being always MARXIST inspired revisionist drivel. Their 'costume dramas are merely an exercise in historical revisionism to promote the multi-cult Marxist dystopia. Volumes upon volumes of books could be filled with comments such as these. ‘Multi-cult Marxist dystopia . . ? Clearly, something is not quite right here, and has not been since at least 2016 and beyond. The election of Donald Trump as US president and the UK’s vote to leave the EU has, it would appear, heralded in a new age of consciousness in a hitherto docile public: @Anon Would we have known just how infested the BBC are with left wing propaganda? Brexit has been the awakening for many, including me. The more it attacks the US president and the more it attempts to undermine Brexit, suspicions that have been hitherto vague began to crystallise: how does the BBC’s claim to be an impartial, politically neutral broadcaster square with its continuous, at time petty and vindictive attacks on the democratically-elected president of the United States? If the broadcaster is indeed a ‘national’ voice representative of the country as a whole, why has it been doing everything in its power to undermine the outcome of the 2016 EU Referendum in which some 17.4 million citizens expressed a desire to leave the union? @Anon Brexit has exposed the BBC for what it is. Its time is up. The mask appears to be slipping, the ‘heavenly show’ not quite so alluring, the proclamations not quite so convincing. And so social media echoes to the sound of BBC bashing: Brussels Broadcasting Corporation, British Bullshitting Corporation, Bolshevik Broadcasting Corporation , not forgetting our own particular favourite (and inspiration for this book) British Brainwashing Corporation . These are just some of the more printable interpretations of the BBC acronym seen on the net. While the broadcaster has always had its critics, this is unchartered territory. Antipathy towards the corporation is visceral.
from the introduction to
David Sedgwick
BBC Brainwashing Britain   available on Amazon/Kindle and other book stores

Saturday, 24 June 2017

BBC and Free Speech



The book of Nehemiah describes Nehemiah as a cupbearer (poison taster) looking very glum in Nebuchadnezzar's Court.
Presumably after the emperor's humbling spell in the fields as an animal. "How can I look happy when Jerusalem lies in ruins?", remembering the Lords Word about 70 years of exile. Unlike people on Facebook, Nehemiah took God's Word to the day.
Nebuchadnezzar the world authority commissioned Nehemiah to begin reconstruction of Jerusalem.
Now you are going to see why I raise this today.
We DON'T have a world ruler yet, but the Bristish people have voted by 4% margin to leave Europe and according to our rulership manual this makes our decision binding.
OUR GREAT LEADER....US....have voted.
Now Nehemiah didn't have any problem with the GREAT LEADER but was commissioned by him to do the job.
But you would never know with the satraps who worked for the BBC and the rest of Rothschild's media beyond the River.
They did their utmost to sway the vote and bring the rebuild to a standstill.
Last night, the Conservative party dared to raise this matter of prevarication on the part of the media and this morning hiding behind the voice of a liberal MP they squealed " YOU SHOULD APOLOGISE TO THE GREAT BBC WHO ARE JUST THE VOICE OF FREE SPEECH".
Free speech? When was the BBC the voice of Sovereignty and free speech? Their very logo of ONENESS on BBC ONE is all about globalist rule under a globalist world government being sown into people's minds as warm cuddly and full of friendly hippos.
Every comedian they hire like Hugh Dennis reviles Brexit at every turn.
Hugh Dennis BBC Comedian
Anybody who dared recommend Brexit the BBC labelled as xenophobe.....and violent British National Party thugs.
Since when did BBC stand for free speech and the voice of the people? And now hiding behind the sofa where the liberal politician is speaking they trump up....
You tell em , you tell 'em
APOLOGISE to the GREAT BRITISH MEDIA for actually daring to raise the subject about European bias.
WHAT US? IN Lord Rothschild's pocket?BBC would say
Just because we have a Rothschild director doesn't mean you can possibly label us in favour of globalist elite rule?
US. Whiter than white BBC.
Excuse me, and apologise now!!!!

Wednesday, 18 January 2017

Beneath the thin Veneer

Facebook Status 18/1/2017
Chris Welch BBC One Show is very absorbing but one of its roles is brainwashing.It is done cleverly in that quite often there will be a corrective role and therefore supply some element of truth but broadly it is a wolfhound or snapping crocodile at the side of the road to keep you herded with the masses.
Messages like
Don't even look into the subject of vaccines
You must use fluoride
You mustn't look into why farmers feed their animals 90 minerals to ensure they don't have to pay vet bills. Why not humans? Because the health service would crash if we were fit and well.
This week we have had..... straw men created around the natural clean eating arena.... as if many many of our conditions can't be cleared more or less straight away by completely overhauling our diets without recourse to big pharma pills. They have doctors immediately disabusing us if these things. (Their livelihood)
Last night I switched on to the end of a false news stories article to help combat the increasing lack of trust in mainstream news. They OFCOURSE just highlight extreme internet or National Enquirer stories. But anybody knows from their own lives the extreme highs and lows of their lives can hardly be related in leftbrain environments because the frequency of in the nick of time deliverances without any real comprehensible cause and effect sequence are so manifold the only place we could share what really goes on is in a testimony meeting and the BBC being Masonic aren't about to authorise anything like that but in the fringes of Songs of Praise. Hopefully as people emerge snail like from their own shells from the internet there will be so many speaking the truth Auntie Bbc Rothschild won't be able to muzzle us

Judy Povey It's been distressing finally realising how well brainwashed we are/I have been.
Like · Reply · 1 hr
Chris Welch
Chris Welch when the awful truth starts ripping our skin away, we really feel sick for days as Daniel did when the angel first told him what was planned.
Like · Reply · 24 mins

Chris Welch Last week I delivered a piano and they noticed some things I put on my business card about how I am available for sharing about many of the spiritual discoveries I have made while in the piano trade.

The husband and wife were amazing. They had just spent 18months sailing round the world with their kids. (Digression but interesting. The Dad was asked to come into the school office after "ship schooling " the kids. It was several weeks after the term began.
Mr (such and such) we wanted to call you in about your child. he is finding it hard. The Dad gulped, not being a teacher.
Yes sir, I am afraid your son is now a bit too advanced, he is about a year ahead, we are trying to help him not get bored.. End of digression)

But i shared how i had noticed that at the moment either neither couple "gets" the true situation as in - happy with BBC and Fox interpretation of events....

or at most one spouse "gets it".

The man was the one in his family, and with Sean Withinshaw , Tim Elwell, Rohan Barton and others of my male friends, it is they so far that have cottoned on to things. But it is also going to be the case in my musical profession that I deal with creatives, who in broad scenarios are always decades ahead of the public at large, by virtue of how they are built.
But as i said to them....on Facebook it's many times the reverse gender roles. I think Shirley Unger Cunningham , and Annalize Mouton and so many other women here already see the bigger picture, and my guess is their spouses don't yet.

All i can say is, it is soooooo grueling when the large jigsaw pieces are suddenly revealed....like I say...you can be sick for days.

Unfortunately while we were establishing a church in Les Ulis Paris, David McCulloch senior was having a complete download around 1981......we all thought he was going paranoid because he was stuck in a new country as a missionary....and he'd been lacking in social interaction.

My wife kept telling me about 3 years ago that I was losing my mind.

So presumably God has to wait for good moments to leak this stuff out, so some normal semblance of order can be maintained in families.

Certainly the Woody Allen figure in Antz, had a hard time fitting into community when the awful truth started to hit him.
Hidden Guiding Machinery -

 Bilderberg Meetings

Architects of War- Asian Build up

False Arab Spring and Syrian Manipulation




The Queen Attempts to Warn Us



and Below
Sarah Abed and Nessa Beeley https://www.facebook.com/nessa.beeley?fref=ts  report from Syria
Nessa Beeley
16 January at 09:17 ·
Sarah Abed writes to James Longman, BBC

"I am really loving all of these comments. So many truth advocates in one place. It really makes my heart smile to see this. What was probably intended by James to be a safe room where he can be comfortered by his fans quickly turned into a rude awakening for him and anyone else that has made a living telling lies in msm.

After almost 6 years and 400,000 lives lost in Syria it seems that people are finally accepting the truth. The truth that many Syrians such as myself have been trying to tell for many years on behalf of our family and friends that are enduring these unbelievable conditions brought in by foreign intervention. A well planned and executed invasion by the West and their allies. This was never a civil war, it was never a revolution, it was not part of the organic uprisings that took place known as the Arab Spring. I see that many people here know that, you know the truth and even if msm has spent billons, to make this seem like something it's not their plan is failing.

Independent journalists such as Eva Karene Bartlett, Vanessa Beeley shared with the world a glimpse into what really took place and what the people really want the West to know.

I was in Syria 6 months before the war started and there was absolutely no indication that this was going to take place. What we do know is that there were players getting ready to act out this very elaborate production, they stockpiled weapons in mosques and were ready for their que. Much like the White Helmets they were paid actors made to fool the world into accepting lies.

One fact that comforts myself and others is that no matter what happens.. eventually the truth does come out. In order to end this war we need everyone to speak out against the lies. The more people know the truth the harder it is for their governments to play this "savior role" while sponsporing terrorism. It's important for every single person that knows the truth to keep telling others. Syrians and humanity as a whole is counting on you.



Oh and James, you might want to audition for the next Fifty Shades of Gray movie.. I think fiction is more up your alley"

Sunday, 26 July 2015

Science Versus Evolution p.3 - Some Telling Symptoms

What are my options?
The astonishing thing then, is that despite all the propaganda, the theory of evolution can be shown to be false and easily disproved by the average person in the street who has even the slightest interest in biology, physics, chemistry or the information sciences.
Yet we are so often told that evolution is proven science, but belief in a Creator is merely religion.

This was highlighted in a recent debate with the Rt. Honourable Mr Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Education about the proposed teaching of evolution to primary school children. The Government ignored the scientific questions raised to them and tried to reduce the argument to 'evolution vs. faith', saying: 'The [Education] department accepts that faith may give rise to personal misgivings about including this topic in the primary curriculum for the first time'. In other words, anything that challenges the dogma of evolution is a matter of personal faith! Why was it the government didn't address a single scientific objection raised to them? Because quite simply, on the ground of science, they would lose.

The Education Secretary was asked to give just one piece of scientific evidence, something that doesn't have to be taken by faith. Just one thing that is observable, testable, repeatable; just one piece of evidence that would warrant teaching this to primary school children as part of a science lesson. The Rt. Honourable Mr Michael Gove, Secretary of State for Education could not provide a single piece of evidence, but simply replied saying "The government is very frm in its position. I am sorry but there is nothing more the department can say on the matter"5 (Correspondence reference 2013/0049695). Or to put it another way, 'Our mind is made up, don't confuse us with the facts!'

Why then, is evolution so popular and so promoted? Because evolutionists and the government recognise that the only other option is that 'in the beginning God... ' (Genesis 1:1), and that is something 'educated' scientists, governments and the media are unwilling to face. Francis Crick, one of the two men who discovered DNA, made this telling statement: "Biologists must constantly keep in mind what they see was not designed, but evolved" 11. If everything looks like it was designed, if all the evidence points clearly in that direction, why is scientific enquiry not allowed to consider the possibility? The reality is, that if God can be done away with, then governments are the highest power, scientists are the highest intelligence and the media are accountable to no-one.

The Bible speaks of those who would one day scoff at its teaching; of these people the Bible says they are 'wilfully ignorant'. In other words, they can see the truth for themselves, but they refuse to accept it. The apostle Paul, in writing to the Christians in Rome said: "For the invisible things of [God] from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse" (Romans 1:20). Further, Paul
launches a damming indictment on `man's wisdom' saying; "Where is the wise? where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this world? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?" (i Corinthians 1:20). "Because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man — and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things" (Romans 1:21-23).
Ancient cultures worshipped idols made of wood and stone; however, whist this must have been insulting to the one true God, today's academia has invented an even more insulting idol, and has attributed all the beauty, symmetry, order, design, scientific laws and the wonder of creation to... nothing!

No longer is it 'In the beginning God created...'. The mantra of today's schools, colleges and universities is 'in the beginning Nothing...' Then they call the Biblical explanation, with a beginning (verified by science), a universe that has been stretched out (verified by science), an Earth that is a globe (verified by science) hanging on nothing in space (verified by science), a Sun and Moon that exist to enable life on Earth and mark seasons (observable), life that suddenly appears on Earth (observable in the fossil record), creatures that reproduce only after their kind (verified by science and observation), a human race that is degenerating (verified by science), a world-wide flood (observable), a world that once had a uniform climate (verified by science), an ocean with 'pathways' (verified by science), the hydro cycle (verified by science) etc. etc... they call all of this, ' myth' or`religious belief', but nothing exploding and defying countless laws of nature and violating unnumbered Scientific facts, this they call "scientific knowledge, supported by extensive, robust evidence"
Again we ask the Rt. Honourable Mr Michael Gove, or any evolutionist, for just one piece of your 'extensive, robust evidence'. Please? Pretty please? Why has it gone quiet? Why have you 'nothing more to say'?

It may come as a surprise to many, that the theory of evolution is not so quickly embraced as assume.
For example, Serbia's government ordered schools to stop teaching the theory of evolution, sa evolution left many questions unanswered and was at best "dogmatic". Serbia's Education MiniStE Colic, decided that the teaching of evolution should be suspended. The Cabinet of Serbian PrimE Vojislav Kostunica backed the decision saying it was clear that the evolutionary explanation for " and development of man is full of voids". Colic added that science cannot be true science unless it i all possibilities, whereas most academic authorities, which are controlled by evolutionists, dc students to consider anything other than their theory.'?
"a way of getting a glimpse of God's mind." 11
As a believer himself, Collins finds exploring nature to be
said: "40 pe- Cent o working scientists claim to be believers".
Dr. Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project

The Evolutionists seem to know everything about the missing link  except the fact that  it is missing - G.K. Chesterton

Jerry Bergman, PhD, has compiled a list of almost 3,000 scientists and professors who reject evolution of whom hold PhDs in science. He believes that he could easily complete a list of l0,000 names.
Even a casual follower of current news stories will have heard of the controversy raging in the USA regarding the proposed teaching of 'intelligent design' alongside Evolution theory in American schools. The cry from the evolutionists is that this is mixing religion with science. Those who say such things should quietly resign as they obviously have no grasp of what science is. Science is knowledge gained by observation using one or more of our five senses.
This is irrespective of our beliefs. However, the way we interpret our observations will depend on our belief systems — either 'Nothing exploded and then it evolved', or 'In the beginning God...' They are the only two options. We should remember that even biologists, chemists and archaeologists have a bias that will shape the way they interpret their observations.Science versus Evolution p5-6

Ch. 27 - Stifling the opposition by Michael Bowden The Rise of the Evolution Fraud

A number of people, among them several scientists who oppose the theory of evolution, whether it be on Biblical or scientific grounds or both, have formed groups, written books, given lectures and done all that they could to publicize the very considerable amount of scientific evidence against evolution. How many do oppose evolution would be difficult to say, but it is certainly far larger than most people would imagine, and the number is rising.
In America, the efforts of the creationist groups and their many supporters are at last beginning to have an effect. In some States, there have been several attempts to have a law passed that where evolution is taught, then 'scientific creationism' [effectively the scientific evidence for creation without reference to the Bible] should be given an equal amount of time. This was hotly contested in the courts by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and teachers organisations who claim it is importing religion into the classroom 'by the back door'. In America and the UK today, the emphasis has shifted to the teaching of "Intelli­gent Design" (ID).
In Britain the creationist's case has rarely received any recognition.

Quite recently, however. various articles have appeared seemingly in response to the growing numbers of those who support creation and the public presentation of the evidence. What is noticeable in such articles (or programmes) is that, although they may admit that there are a few "difficulties" with the theory, they will then proceed at some length to "explain" how certain objections can be overcome. What is certain is that at no time will a creationist be given a fair chance to present serious scientific objections to the theory. Any contributions made by a creationist will be carefully edited so that the only comments published will be those dealing with the general aspects of evolution such as the theological problems of origins. Serious scientific evidence receives no publicity whatsoever for to do so may provoke awkward questions on whether the theory is factually true when for years it has been paraded before the general public as "no longer a theory but proven fact".
Numerous lectures have been given on the scientific evidence which contradicts evolution and supports Genesis. Often the question is asked why such facts are never shown on any television programme. The answer is simply that no matter how frequently or by what means the BBC are approached, the end result is always a refusal to grant creationists a fair chance to present their case. The response is the same from any of the radio authorities, larger publishers, national newspa­pers, etc. etc.
What is certain is that at no time will a creationist be given a fair chance to present serious scientific objections to the theory.


It may appear that such a jaundiced comment is only to be expected from a minority group who fail to get a hearing for their peculiar views. However, all who lecture and write against evolution can testify to the very considerable interest which the subject generates when people are presented with facts which they have never heard before, whether Christians or not.
Such is the freedom - some would call it licence - in this country to discuss openly such subjects as explicit sex, adultery, abortion, eutha­nasia and other contentious matters, but the one subject which is sacrosanct is the theory of evolution. Such a statement may appear exaggerated, but there are numerous incidents which justify such a claim.
I therefore set out just a few of the many instances which have come to my notice, or have happened to me personally. In what follows, I have refrained from deliberately searching out sensational stories, but I am sure there are many such worthy of further investigation. Gerry' Bergman is an excellent researcher and has written an extensive article on this bias against creationists in Journal of Creation 9(2):267-275 August 1995 which appears at;
http://creationontheweb.com/content/view/1784/


1. THE B.B.C.
(A) Dr. Gish
As a one time Director of the Institute of Creation Research, Califor‑
nia now retired, he has travelled extensively, speaking on the creation
versus evolution debate. Whilst touring in this country, he once said; "When a creationist is available they'll put him on TV. I have been interviewed many times on television in the States. I have been interviewed on nationwide TV in New Zealand and Aus­tralia. But your BBC... I think they are the worst when it comes to excluding an alternative point of view"[41 ].
128 Ch. 27 - Stifling the opposition
they could put on TV.
Thus, was our great, highly regarded and much loved institution ruthlessly taken over and used for the destruction of our national ethos. It is interesting that all BBC recruitment is now only advertised in the Left Wing Guardian newspaper, so the bias continues.
2. Local Radio
In 1978, Professor Edgar Andrews and I were interviewed by Rev. M. Hall for his weekly programme, "Christian Forum" on Radio Trent When this was duly broadcast, it generated considerable interest. A few months later it was also used by the London Broadcasting Com­pany, and again it provoked interest. In January 1980 the London Broadcasting Company re-transmitted the programme and used it to measure their "audience rating'.
The response this time was "the largest they had ever received" [consisting of twelve letters incidentally!] and I was invited by the interested producer to have an interview one Sunday afternoon for transmission later that evening. After we had met, he mentioned. "some people actually believe the world was created in six days". When I replied that I also believed this and gave lectures on the scientific evidence in its support, his lower jaw almost dented the floor. The interview, in which I challenged evolutionists to a debate, was eventually completed, and, a little to my surprise, actually transmitted.
Despite writing, telephoning and leaving messages, I did not receive any response whatsoever, neither did they forwarded any letters they may have received requesting information, or details of my books.
I subsequently met the Chairman of the Religious Advisory Board of LBC. He said he would try to arrange a debate on the subject and I suggested the name of Prof. Berry, a prominent Christian theistic evolutionist. No response was received.

This sudden silence is quite typical of an initial great interest shown by producers and editors, only to be followed by a sharp "cooling off . It seems to me that either they become aware of how 'hot' the subject is and fear ridicule from their professional colleagues, or alternatively (or additionally) they receive a direct order from senior executives that no further time or space is to be given to the topic. As a commercial firm, here was an opportunity to greatly increase their audience ratings, yet they avoided doing so. This proves to me that not publicising creation is even more important than commercial gain.
Later, in reply to two articles in The Church of England Newspaper by Prof. Berry in 1998 and 2002 1 pointed out that a number of his claims were simply untrue. In each of my replies (they were both published) I invited him to a debate [See ref. 101] but the usual silence followed. Thus the Gospel according to Theistic Evolution continues to be founded on the many lies of Evolution.
3. The Press
The same response is received when approaches are made to the National Press, periodicals, liberal Church newspapers, etc. Invariably, no matter how many letters may be received by a publication in response to a statement perhaps by the "Science Correspondent", whilst a few may be printed which criticize evolution in a general way, none will appear which give factual refutation. The usual excuse is "lack of space".

4. Universities
(A) Mr. Andrew Loose MSc
Mr. Loose took a B.Sc. in astronomy. The subject he chose for his dissertation was "The Age of the Universe". In researching for this, he examined all the various methods which had been used to give a date to the earth, the solar system and the universe. In every single case he found that considerable speculation was involved, and effectively the results were made to comply with evolutionary presuppositions regard­ing time scales.
When in due course he presented his paper, his was the only one that the Professor of the Department personally attended. Shortly after­wards, an instruction was issued that in future students would not be allowed to choose their own subjects, but must first confer with and receive the approval of the lecturers.
He subsequently went to another university to take his MSc. Further discussions on the subject of the age of the universe with a number of eminent astronomers — including the Astronomer Royal of the day — failed to show that his conclusions were in error.
(B) Dr. Arthur Jones
Whilst he was an undergraduate, Dr. Jones was awarded a prize for an inter-faculty essay on Communism, in which he was openly crea­tionist. When his Zoology Professor awarded him the prize, he told Dr. Jones that "No one who does not accept evolution will ever do research in my department". Undeterred, he nevertheless applied and, somewhat to his surprise, was accepted. Later, when he was being interviewed for his Ph.D., the assistant interviewer bluntly asked. "If we award you your Doctorate, how do we know you won't then use it to spread your views on creation?" The senior inter-viewer, however, interrupted and said the question was unfair and should not be answered.
Difficulties facing students
Perhaps at this point we should consider the difficult position of children and students who are creationists, when they are taught evolu­tion at schools or colleges.
Instruction in schools about evolution is invariably given as if it were a proven fact, but when teachers are challenged on this, the reply is that it is only taught as 'a theory'. But this aspect is so little referred to, if at all, that a class of young children will certainly absorb it as proven fact. How often children tell their parents that because "teacher said so" then it must be an incontrovertible fact! The absorption of evolution would of course be greatly strengthened if not a single fact or argu­ment against evolution is presented. The reason for this may be that the teacher is completely unaware of any such evidence existing. Alterna­tively they may realise that to teach anything different to the standard set of notes on evolution would be to enter fields of contention which are not conducive to a quiet life! Those who take this 'easy way out' may like to reflect what a disservice they are doing to the generation they seek to serve so conscientiously.
At universities, the situation is even more difficult. A young student may disagree with the evidence for the theory being given by a lecturer, but may be unwilling to criticize him before the whole class and thereby incur his displeasure.
Similarly, when answering questions in examinations (not necessarily on evolution), to refer to evidence which contradicts the theory could make just that difference between pass and failure, should his paper be marked by an ardent evolutionist. I am sure that such could happen and at times does. Lecturers cannot claim to be totally free of personal views when dealing with such a fundamental subject as evolution. Indeed, it is not unknown for some people to become highly emotional when doubt is expressed about the theory.
THE ONGOING OPPOSITION
Since the first edition of this book, the mass media display exactly the same bias as they have at all times. In one TV programme, the creationist, in a local studio, was placed in a small room and instructed not to look at a monitor, so he was unable to see the opposing speakers in the main studio. In another case, the creationist could only hear the studio with a two second delay due to "technical reasons". This caused him great confusion and he appeared hesitant and uncertain in trying to comment on the discussion. There are many "tricks of the trade" that technicians and editors can use to put people at a disadvantage and give them an appearance of incoherence and confusion.
POLL SURVEY RESULTS
The United Kingdom
A Mori Poll of 2,000 people gave the results ‑
Creation 22%, Intelligent Design 17%, Evolution 48%, Don't know 13%. Thus, 52% did not believe in evolution! One biology teacher reported "Many of my pupils training to be biologists are creationists, and they are often the brightest pupils."
An article in the Independent, Sunday 1 June 2008, said;
"Professor Steve Jones said religious students – even those studying medicine – were becoming increasingly vocal in their opposition to evolution, saying he was 'telling lies and insulting people's religion' by teaching the subject."
"They want permission not to come to those lectures and sit those exam questions," he said. "I have been teaching genetics and evolutionary biology for 30 years and for the first 20 I think the issue arose once. That's changed." [94].
Initially, I assumed that it was Christian believers complaining about the course, but to bluntly claim that the lecturer was "telling lies" and "insulting" their religion did not quite accord with the usual British understatement and reluctance to be so condemnatory. When it was mentioned that some Muslims had complained about lectures on evolu­tion, all became clear that it was from this faith that the main com­plaints came. British reserve and fear of upsetting the tutors - and thereby failing their exams - probably prevents Christians from making such outspoken comments. Muslims seem to have no such reserva­tions!
This quotation was used at the beginning of an interview with this author on LBC Radio on 2 June 2008. The interviewer referred to the 40% who rejected evolution and said I would be pleased with this result. I agreed, but I wondered about the remaining 60%. 1 said "How many of them actually agreed with creation, but dare not mention this for fear of losing their job?" - to which he replied "You may well be right! "

In Chapter 17 I reported the 1986 Oxford Union debate in which no less than 42% of the undergraduates voted for creation! The shock to the governing body resulted in the whole debate being expunged from their records.
Thus, despite the overwhelming propaganda for evolution by all the mass media, education authorities, etc., a surprisingly high percentage of the population still accept creation as more credible of the two theories, but this is ignored and the propaganda continues unabated.
America
There have been a number of attempts to allow the teaching of creation in schools, but this has been fiercely resisted by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
Despite the powerful forces in opposition, the growing evidence contradicting evolution is gradually reaching the public. Gallup has carried out surveys of the American public every few years and the results have been reasonably consistent. Taking their first and latest surveys for 1991 and 1997 and a CBS survey of 2006, the average of these results gave -
Creation - 49%, Theistic Evolution 35%, Evolution - 11% [93].
These are figures are surprising in view of the propaganda pressure US citizens receive from official sources - the ACLU, scientific organi­sations, school authorities, etc.
The results from scientists, however are completely different - Crea­tion 5%, Theistic Evolution 40%, Evolution 55%. This shows that many scientists bow the knee at the altar of Evolution, but the question still remains; how many agree with creation but only privately for the sake of their jobs!
The Rest of the World
One survey [93] said that broadly, Europe mainly accepted evolu­tion, whilst in the mainly Muslim Middle East, creation predominated. In Africa, most people are surprised that anyone should think that life on this earth could possibly have arisen by pure chance. They are too close to the land and see the miracle of growth every day to think that it is all an accident!
The threats against all critics
I am convinced that there are many Christian and non-Christian scientists who have studied the evidence against evolution and find it at least reasonably convincing. However, depending on the work they do and their position in their company or government organisation, they will never admit that they have reservations about evolution, for they are well aware that they will be ridiculed, and possibly ostracised - and few are prepared to accept that. They know that their promotion prospects would be damaged as this would enable them to promote their contentious views further. They could also face possible dis­missal, with all the disastrous repercussions this would have on their lives, income, career and family.

I reported the 1986 Oxford Union debate in which no less than 42% of the undergraduates voted for creation! The shock to the governing body resulted in the whole debate being expunged from their records.


It might be thought that the possibility of dismissal is a ridiculous charge to make against evolutionists who are in positions of authority, but this not so. Let me relate a few of the cases that have received some publicity. There are no doubt others that are not as well recorded as these.

Richard Sternberg
Richard Sternberg was the editor of the Proceedings of the Biologi­cal Society of Washington which was under the auspices of the Smith­sonian Institute. In 2004 he received an article that supported the case for Intelligent Design. As he was a specialist in evolutionary theory he decided to review it himself as he had often done before, but he discussed it three times with a qualified colleague and then sent it out for three peer reviews. All involved were thoroughgoing evolutionists but, nevertheless, all agreed that the paper should be published. Fol­lowing publication, complaints began to arise, mainly from federal government employees acting in concert with an outside advocacy group, the National Center for Science Education.
When the controversy blew up and attempts were made to fire him, the whole subject was investigated by two official government com­mittees who fully exonerated him. He did resign from his position but this had been arranged long before the controversy arose [91 ].
Although not successful in removing him because he allowed an article supportive of Intelligent Design to be published, it does demon­strate the forces that can be marshalled by evolutionists when they feel threatened. If nothing else, even though they were not fully successful, they know that these events will be taken as a warning to others in less prestigious levels of their professions to be sure that they do not cross the authorities to whom they are beholden for their salaries.
Michael Behe
Michael Behe is Professor of Biochemistry in the Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University. He is also a member of the Intelligent Design group and has written several books critical of evolution. His most well known illustration of "irreducible complex­ity" is a mouse trap; take any one of its components away and it will not work. In the same way, the complexity of life is such that any removal of an important component with either kill the organism or seriously impair its function. Life could not possibly have arisen by a series of small changes; it had to be right first time.
He originally accepted evolution, but gradually came to see that there were serious flaws in it. He eventually wrote against it, and was duly turned on by his professional colleagues.
He records some of the comments he has received-,
(a) One professor called him a "screwball". Behe commented "In a way it actually makes me feel good when Darwinists call me names. First, it shows that they are having a tough time coming up with actual arguments against design. It also shows that they aren't the coolly logical persons they would have everyone think they are".
(b) Asked why ID writers never appear in peer reviewed publica­tions, he replied "I've tried to publish on this topic in journals, but the editors were not receptive. So I and my colleagues have written books to explain design." His books, in fact, were more carefully reviewed and vetted than most articles in journals.
The Kansas Board decision
In 1995, The National Academy of Sciences laid down regulations for the teaching of science in the schools. A few years later, the Kansas Board of Education appointed a committee to advise on implementing these regulations. It was then discovered that the regulations insisted

that only evolution theory alone should be taught in the science classes, and that it should be used as a "unifying concept" for all science education. The board decided not to implement the more extreme evolutionary requirements of the regulations. Predictably, the reaction from evolutionists was ferocious.
The editor of Scientific American contended that the educational standards in Kansas were obviously poor. He said:
"Make it clear that in light of the newly lowered education standards in Kansas, the qualifications of any students applying from that state in the future will have to be considered very carefully. Send a clear message to the parents in Kansas that this bad decision carries consequences for their children. If kids in Kansas aren't being taught properly about science, they won't be able to keep up with children taught competently elsewhere. It's called survival of the fittest. Maybe the Board of Education needs to learn about natural selection firsthand."
Thus was the board threatened with academic isolation should it pursue its intended course. The reaction of other official organisations was equally strong.
After a campaign, the board was changed and the NAS regulations were accepted, but later a further vote placed conservatives back in power. Eventually, in 2005, by 6 votes to 4, the teaching of Intelligent Design was approved for teaching as well as evolution.
You can see the fierce reactions of evolutionists that any limitation to their propaganda provokes. Behe commented "Bureaucracies with power do not relinquish it easily."

Summary
The few examples which I have given above do indicate the variety of ways in which the dogma of evolution is carefully protected from public exposure of its scientific weaknesses. Enquiries amongst one's scientific friends would, I am sure, reveal many more instances.
In this chapter we have only briefly considered how some of our major institutions effectively block any serious criticisms of evolution from reaching the the general public. There is however one establish­ment organisation which so far exceeds these in its popular promotion of the theory that it requires a complete chapter to do justice to the investigation of its activities.
(Chapter 28 was on the natural history Museum reported in the first part)

Friday, 25 April 2014

When the devil says what would otherwise be normal, natural positive phrases


Have you noticed when the devil says what would otherwise be normal, natural positive phrases, they suddenly sound disgusting.
Examples
When the BBC say Pro-Life on the news it sounds like something totally weird, a fringe activity. So Yup...you betcha...I am FOR LIFE. I am not for DEATH. If a child just doesn't quite yet have the luxury of being fully developed yet, I am FULLY FOR its future, to GIVE LIFE A GO. Killing that life off, I am not for. OK?
Truthers. Ever heard that word? Like whistleblowing might be wrong for instance?
OK...what's the alternative? LIARS? Does that make me mainstream?
Heterosexual. A terrible option it would seem. Like there is something wrong with me. I'm a male. I like women. According to statistics, that's 96% of us.
Christian. So I believe, yes, God connected with three consecutive family members in an incredible way, Abraham,Isaac and Jacob, furthering revelation through each. Then He sought to roll out that relationship first through a people, the Jews, then to to the rest of the world through the one reconciling event of His Son...God in Man form. He set the whole thing up thousands of years ahead of time in a book written by many many authors. Because the reconciling event would be over in a weekend, He even designed a whole slowmotion blueprint of what was going on again hundreds of years in advance, called the tabernacle. Then right on cue according to the prophecy of Isaiah 53, His Son, the true LAMB sacrifice, did suffer at man's hands, died, but rose again as promised to carry on telling us about it for 40 days, before His ascension. So yes, I certainly am a Christian. No other God story even comes close. If you want to be an atheist, that's up to you, but you still have to come up with a reason that Earth is so beautiful and perfect for us, and just about everywhere else isn't.
Violent A very non PC word. I have come to "blows" with my good friend Daniel Yordy on this. YUP I believe in one legitimate violence. The tearing down of every last Ezekiel 8:10 scrawling on people's inner walls. Tearing down proud speculations and thoughts that raise themselves against the Lordship of Christ. No, I do not believe in being nice to devils, any more than the doctors behave nicely with cancer. " The Kingdom suffers violence, and violent men take it by force." This is all inward stuff. It is mentioned in the Koran too. But both Christian USA and Muslim Arab nations take it too literally....and to misquote St Paul..they DO FIGHT AGAINST FLESH AND BLOOD, but they do it with Harvard and Oxford educated niceness that the BBC will report on the news.

Tuesday, 18 March 2014

Steve Chalke,Seals and Secularism (Preaching)

You can tell a Brit a mile off. He's the idiot that believes everything as long as it is preceded by the word secular.

Secular is his authority, even if he's religious.

For centuries we had preaching. So when the radio was invented it was natural that independent Christians use it in the UK to get their particular message across. But Christians obey the "secular voice" because for them secular means reason. Means the only way to behave. So all a Luciferian has to do to get his policies through is  to say..."the secular policy is"..... and all Christians immediately fall into line like performing seals.
"Ofcourse," the Brit agrees," preaching must be banned. Children must be given a fair choice. They need to make up their own minds." Well, if Christianity was from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil like in Genesis 3, that would be fine. But that principle IS SECULARISM. The very nature of BELIEF is that it is belief. But here's the stickler. SECULAR BELIEF is NOT the same as Christian belief. Secular Belief is a largely Leftbrain affair, although some have what they feel is a gut instinct on it. The FOLLY OF PREACHING is the SPIRITUAL COMMUNICATION OF A NEW TYPE OF FOOD ENTIRELY. Its proof comes AFTERWARDS. SECULARISM only reports BACKWARDS from what appears to be there already.
 Secularism however is also the tool of the Luciferian, because it never reports on things that are true, but that they don't want you to know. Like the fact that  the world is run quite independent of the things a secular man is led to believe run it.(That's why so many things are peculiar. And even a secular person picks up how strange it is, but after being patted on the head by a few Luciferians, and having their secular dummy replaced in their mouth, most Brits are quietly mollified.)
FAITH however REPORTS FORWARDS. It believes in its heart and confesses in its mouth things God has said as though they were already. A Luciferian calls this lying, and bans it from school and the airwaves.

When USSR fell in 1989 there was a spare propaganda station that disbanded on a particular MW frequency. Somehow or other it was donated to United Christian Broadcasters of Northern Ireland for a Christian Radio station (now DAB,Sky and internet). The Luciferian Lords quickly used the pretext of various stunning US Christian media scandals in the late 80s  to maintain a complete stronghold ban on all national Christian radio stations. This religious area is already covered by BBC, they said. What they fail to say is that Luciferians and Jesuits control all religious content in our media as they do in most churches. This is why there is hardly any preaching in Britain, as against say Northern Ireland. The "pulpit style" here is Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil "opinion formation". The irony is this is in many cases  outright lies or confusing halftruths, which is why most people's Christianity doesn't actually work in Britain. The faith frequency in Britain after all this Luciferianism is so low that Evangelist Rheinhard Bonnke can be in Africa on Friday raising people from the dead, then on the Saturday in Westminster Central Hall London, having great problem with shifting headcolds. Jesus used to put people out of rooms. If Jesus were on earth as the Nazarene today, He'd  probably ask Britain to leave the room. Which would be good for the Ferry Operators.

In the 80s Christians were very excited to be told that evangelist Steve Chalke was now "INTO" the hallowed BBC. Ofcourse what actually happened was he became major "eco-reporter" for BBC Radio 4. And this would have been done in the very gentlemanly and firm way Luciferians do things in Board Rooms and Gentleman's London Clubs...But because...hey, this is secular rationality...the Brits all fall in line applauding like the seals. END

This article really originated in the ideas in this Facebook status:
Unless a child goes to a particular type of church which are as rare as hen's teeth in the UK, they will not have heard preaching in all their years of schooling. It is banned in our free country. The "folly" of preaching is not allowed here, and yet it is the power of God unto salvation. Any wonder then the few Christians there are here know nothing of internal regeneration from on high. They use the word Christian to mean a philosophical and moral position. Have you ever tried living with one of those? It's a similar stupidity to being taught spoken French by someone who has never been outside the Birmingham Bangladeshi Community. They have trouble with English, forget French!!
Click for Bookstore
Christianity is a language. It's a spiritual language. It's not really a leftbrain language at all. Like Hebrew, it begins in spirit. Preaching "appears" to outsiders to be folly because it will be the first time a leftbrain child in the UK has heard anyone speaking from the spirit. Heavens, Dawkins has already taught them such a thing doesn't exist. So yes, it will be alarming. For that reason alone, it might provoke the strongest reactions. Even in Israel ,who all understood preaching, the Bible records that after Stephen's preaching they were so incensed they picked up stones and killed him. When did that happen to an Oxford don rector speaking in Leftbrain? END

PREACH THE WORD by Greg Haslam, Westmister Chapel
Chapter 1 covers the whole subject in an introductory chapter of the same name. Hopefully this will wet your appetite to buy or download the book.

Greg Writes
The first sermon of the Christian era was preached on a day of harvest festival – the Day of Pentecost.' It was a day that also celebrated the giving of the Law to Moses at Mount Sinai. For Moses that day had ended tragically as 3,000 drunken revellers perished amid a storm of wind and fire. Remarkably for Peter, the Day of Pentecost resulted in a similar storm of wind and fire, and 3,000 people crossed the gulf from death to life as a result of the words that were on his lips. It was truly a much more significant day to be remembered than the giving of the Torah to Moses. Now we have the gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to preach and the fruit will be far more spectacular.
The era of the Spirit had commenced and church growth began to snowball according to Acts 4:4. The apostles preached incessantly – so much so that the main complaint voiced against them by the authorities was that they Had 'filled Jerusalem' with their teaching. Oh, that the same could be said over every town and city in our nations today – that these Christians have filled the city with their teaching, the word, the message they bring.
Such effects as the apostles achieved – dramatic church growth and equally dramatic hostility as a result – were not the result of inter-faith festivals, the creative arts, jumble sales or Christian rock concerts! It was through persistent preaching, day by day in the temple courts, or visiting house to house. They never ceased proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ. If we today would see the same apostolic results, then we have to emulate the same apostolic methods!
The apostle Paul did nothing more nor less than this. Indeed, he said he was always eager to preach.'  Only one of his recorded sermons in the book of Acts was preached to believers, so far as I can tell. The rest were aimed at Jewish and Pagan unbelievers. The record of his preaching to believers is, of course, summarised for us in the epistles of the New Testament. But what Paul had every confidence in was the proclamation of the truth to unbelievers. As converts multiplied and churches were planted he expressed his conviction that, 'God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe'." So seriously did Paul view his commission that he solemnly announced a self-imposed curse if he ever reneged on this responsibility: 'Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!'  This yields a very vital and important principle: Christianity is an enterprise that expands primarily through the activity of preaching. The parable of the sower, which is considered cardinal and central to all of Jesus' parables of the Kingdom, confirms that, 'A farmer went out to sow his seed ... The farmer sows the word.


And at the fast-growing Space Cadets mega-church, in their purpose-built glass and steel cathedral on the other side of town, Pastor Robby More (`That's M-O-R-E: more for me, more for you!') is showing a twelve-minute video on 'Improving your golf swing', to be followed by an eight-minute presentation on the 'spiritual lessons to be learned by hole-in-one believers on the fairway of life'. Here ends our day trip. If these cameos have any accuracy at all, and I believe they do, then much of the Body of Christ is being fed on a sustained, low-calorie diet of hard-tack, junk-food, cardboard and pap. Clearly, all is not well in All-is-not-well-ville. These various well-meaning departures from the true biblical priorities of God's people have resulted in at least seven long-term effects:
1. Both quantitative and qualitative growth in the Church of Jesus Christ has been significantly stunted in the West for decades, perhaps for a century or more.
 2. Passion for Jesus Christ has almost died, even among the once faithful.
 3. The Bible itself lies largely unknown by most, forgotten and neglected somewhere.
4. Faith has well-nigh faded from view in terms of its expression in vigorous prayer, in effective apologetic and interface with the world, and in terms of action that transforms lives and communities.
5. The big picture that the Bible presents, our whole world and life view, has almost totally been forgotten and is barely understood by even a minority of the Christian Church.
6. Cults and false religions have seemingly triumphed in many respects, filling the vacuum left by our abdication of responsibility and retreat from our priorities.
 7. The lost have dismissed both us and our message as weightless and irrelevant — irrelevant to their lives and to the ultimate questions that are plaguing them at this time in our nation.
We have to admit that it is very difficult at the present time to preach the truth of the Word faithfully in the West. One observer of recent trends, an American writer called George Target, has said, 'Preaching is a sacred relic, a dubious thing of withered skin and dry bones, enclosed in a reliquary of fond remembrance, still encrusted with the jewels of a former glory.' That negative assessment of preaching is actually widespread today. Those who attempt to do it, therefore, are deemed to be dinosaurs — relics from a bygone era who are leading a remnant of what we could call 'Jurassic Park churches', churches full of the long-dead or dying remains of creaking old fossils. They are creatures that failed to make the transition to post-modernity and to post-evangelicalism. Even Webster's Dictionary defines preaching as 'exhorting in an officious and tiresome manner'. If that is the case, then no wonder Madonna sang, 'Papa, don't preach'. Much preaching today actually unsettles and disturbs no one. It just fires blanks. It is too short, too trite, too boring, too empty, or too powerless to knock the wings off a gnat, let alone  shake a man or woman to their boots. It is no wonder, therefore, that people are staying away from our churches Sunday by Sunday in their millions, opting instead for watching low-key breakfast shows on TV, or taking a leisurely and satisfying stroll through the Sunday newspapers, or simply lying in bed later after a busy and tiring week. We need to remind ourselves that this has not always been the case. Someone once defined preaching as 'thirty minutes in which to wake the dead', and it was the Scottish theologian P.T. Forsyth's conviction that, 'The Church rises or falls by her preaching.'1 I happen to believe this is true. Good preaching shapes lives. It renews and reforms churches to become forces to be reckoned with. It can even transform whole towns, communities, even nations, as the marvellous legacy of church history can demonstrate. Frederick W. Robertson, the nineteenth-century preacher based in Brighton, once spoke of what he called 'the intense excitement of preaching'! Presumably he meant his own excitement and that of his hearers. Andrew Blackwood, who taught generations of seminarians how to preach, voiced the conviction that preaching should be at least as exciting as a good ball game. I would go further and say that preaching is a matter of life or death, and there is evidence that God Himself agrees with this. I will substantiate that claim later in this chapter, but first let me reinforce the challenge to preach the Word from the past, on through the present, and into the future.

THE POWER OF THE WORD
God Himself supremely believes in the power of the spoken word. At creation it was God who said, let there be light', and then, 'Let there be an expanse to separate the waters ... Let there be water and seas ... Let there be land, dry land ... Let there be living creatures ... Let there be man.' Every time God said, 'Let there be ... '— there was! People have often coined the phrase 'mere words', but from the Bible's point of view there is no such thing as 'mere' words. Words are the most powerful thing that has ever proceeded from the human personality. God Himself is a speaking God, and He never uses an idle word. In the Bible words are seen to be powerful and creative. They are what we can call 'performative utterances' — they actually effect the content of that which they describe. They make things happen. The words that God puts in our mouths have His own divine power upon them to effect the changes that God wants. They create a new reality. Preachers, especially, have to recover the confidence that this is so. In Genesis chapter 1 we learn that words brought something out of nothing, and shaped what was chaos into a cosmos. Similarly, because we are made in His image, men and women can borrow some of God's creative force so that our words can recreate and reform a ruined world — if God ordains it — by the power of our speech. With our words, under God, we can both create and critique a new people, even bring into being a new culture, to the glory of God!

GOD'S VOICE IN PREACHING
One of the words we use to describe the art or science of good communication in preaching is homiletics. The word is derived from the Greek homologeo which means 'to confess with the mouth', and etymologically can carry the idea: 'To say the same thing as, to speak in accord with, or in agreement with, something objective and outside of yourself.' Simply put, it means that through preaching we should be saying the same thing that God would say in a given situation. Preaching, therefore, can be said to be 'prophetic' in a very real sense of the word, because true biblical preaching says what God wants to say into a specific life situation. You can hear the very voice of God in biblical preaching. The One who spoke with power to generations past is still speaking today. As the Scriptures are opened, its prophetic message unfolds from the pages and speaks to our current environment and society.
GOD ANOINTED MEN TO PREACH
The narratives that run throughout the Torah make it very clear that it was God's purpose to anoint men to preach, often in times of national crisis, for His name's sake. Jude tells us that Enoch, the seventh man from Adam, `prophesied'. We are told by Peter that Noah was a 'preacher of righteousness' for over a hundred years. Israel was led from the death camps of Egypt by Moses, whom Hosea tells us was 'a prophet. All three of these outstanding figures trumpeted God's word to their generation, and were enabled by Him to change their world for the better. All biblical preaching should resound with a similar immediacy and relevance. As Jeremy Middleton said, 'The hour can ripple with the dancing currents of the Creator's voice. It is a dangerous place to be.
THE PROPHETIC VOICE OF PREACHING
Moving on, we think of the company of prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and others. The concise brevity of the records of the ministry of these watchmen of Israel in our Bibles should not mislead us. These men were first and foremost preachers, not writers and poets. They were preachers conveying diagnostic and curative, revelatory and didactic ministry; eyeball to eyeball, face to face with their hearers, often over decades of influential ministry. All authentic preaching is meant to do the same thing. We can still clearly detect, beneath the surface of the writings of Isaiah, Amos, Hosea, Zechariah and the rest, the kind of structure and craftsmanship, the illustration and wordplay, the rugged, direct, penetrating application, that these men of God moved in habitually, to effect the things God wanted.

Words spoken forth from the heart of God resulted in the mobilisation of thousands to His cause. Take, for example, the massive building projects that were initiated after the return from exile. The rebuilding of the temple and then the fallen city walls of Jerusalem would probably never have been completed without the ministry of contemporary prophets who spoke into these situations. Ezra chapter 5, for instance, says,
Now Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the prophet, a descendant of Iddo, prophesied to the Jews in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, who was over them. Then Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel and Jeshua son of Jozadak set to work to rebuild the house of God in Jerusalem. And the prophets of God were with them, helping them. (Ezra 5:1-2)
The result is neatly summarised in Ezra 6:14 where it says,
So the elders of the Jews continued to build and prosper under the preaching of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah, a descendant of Melo.
It is so crucial for us to understand these principles, because there is a dearth of such prophetic preaching and ministry in the Church today. No wonder then that our walls are down! No wonder that the temple of worship is so abysmally ruined! It will continue to be as long as there are no voices to declare God's heart and mind authoritatively to His people.
PREACHING IN THE ERA OF THE HOLY SPIRIT

Looking further ahead in Scripture we discover the era of the Holy Spirit — fore-shadowed by the ministry of John the Baptist, and supremely beginning with the death, resurrection and ascension of our Lord Jesus. We know that John the Baptist broke four hundred years of prophetic silence with an explosion of holy violence against the decadence of his day. His bold, earthy directness in preaching summoned the top-dogs and underdogs of his day to abandon their moral pollution and be baptised as a sign that they had done so. Even a king was on John's 'hit list' for repentance, renewal and life. John single-handedly mounted an assault, both on the corrupt occupying Roman army, and the faithless religious establishment of his day, arraigning them for their brutality, and for their formalism and empty pride. Of course, John the Baptist lost his head in the end — good preachers often do! But Christ said of him that 'no one greater than he' had been born of a woman, and added, 'yet he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.' If John's ministry was so powerful and effective, what may we aspire to?

JESUS' COMMISSION TO PREACH 

Jesus began His public ministry with the announcement that,
'The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to preach good news to the pow...
It is interesting to note how this statement takes priority in Isaiah's prediction. Somebody put it like this, 'God had only one Son, and He made Him a preacher.' What is obvious from the gospel accounts is that preaching was Jesus' priority. Enthusiastic crowds would gather to Him, awestruck at what they perceived to be the authority with which He spoke. If Christ was ever promoted to 'celebrity status' for His spectacular miracles alone, and He frequently was, He would immediately move on. He would leave that healing crusade abruptly, announcing to His bemused disciples as He did in Mark 1:38,
'Let us go somewhere else — to the nearby villages — so I can preach there also. That is why I have come.'
I believe it was Jesus' top priority to preach the Word. Healing is wonderful — those who have been beneficiaries of it know this — but healing, at its best, only repairs bodies for a time. Preaching can restore souls for all eternity. So preaching was, and still is, that important. Before He ascended into heaven, Christ's last order to His disciples was they should 'go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation!' (Mark 16:15).
The first sermon of the Christian era was preached on a day of harvest festival – the Day of Pentecost.' It was a day that also celebrated the giving of the Law to Moses at Mount Sinai. For Moses that day had ended tragically as 3,000 drunken revellers perished amid a storm of wind and fire. Remarkably for Peter, the Day of Pentecost resulted in a similar storm of wind and fire, and 3,000 people crossed the gulf from death to life as a result of the words that were on his lips. It was truly a much more significant day to be remembered than the giving of the Torah to Moses. Now we have the gospel of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to preach and the fruit will be far more spectacular.
The era of the Spirit had commenced and church growth began to snowball according to Acts 4:4. The apostles preached incessantly – so much so that the main complaint voiced against them by the authorities was that they Had 'filled Jerusalem' with their teaching.9 Oh, that the same could be said over every town and city in our nations today – that these Christians have filled the city with their teaching, the word, the message they bring.
Such effects as the apostles achieved – dramatic church growth and equally dramatic hostility as a result – were not the result of inter-faith festivals, the creative arts, jumble sales or Christian rock concerts! It was through persistent preaching, day by day in the temple courts, or visiting house to house. They never ceased proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Christ. If we today would see the same apostolic results, then we have to emulate the same apostolic methods!
The apostle Paul did nothing more nor less than this. Indeed, he said he was always eager to preach.'  Only one of his recorded sermons in the book of Acts was preached to believers, so far as I can tell. The rest were aimed at Jewish and Pagan unbelievers. The record of his preaching to believers is, of course, summarised for us in the epistles of the New Testament. But what Paul had every confidence in was the proclamation of the truth to unbelievers. As converts multiplied and churches were planted he expressed his conviction that, 'God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe'." So seriously did Paul view his commission that he solemnly announced a self-imposed curse if he ever reneged on this responsibility: 'Woe to me if I do not preach the gospel!'  This yields a very vital and important principle: Christianity is an enterprise that expands primarily through the activity of preaching. The parable of the sower, which is considered cardinal and central to all of Jesus' parables of the Kingdom, confirms that, 'A farmer went out to sow his seed ... The farmer sows the word.

PREACHERS OF THE WORD

Church history presents a dazzling gallery of outstanding preachers for us, illuminating the darkness of an otherwise black night sky, and accelerating periods of the Church's greatest advance and progress. Thank God that He has His champions in every century.

In Chapter 3 Liam Goligher will survey the main highlights and the glorious effects of this breathtaking story, and what an inspiring story it is. But our recent contemporary history has had its own illustrious role models — those who took up the baton of faithful witness and proclamation and then passed it on to others.
Borrowing from Dickens' famous opening to his novel A Tale of Two Cities, the past century has seen both 'the best and the worst of times'. No century before has seen such ideological ferment, global warfare, massive cruelty, wholesale genocide and widespread devastation threatening to push us to the brink of destruction. In the Church, tragically, the cancer of theological liberalism and worldly assimilation has accelerated a massive decline, particularly in the West. Decline in the quality and quantity of preaching has led to an emptying of the churches, even threatening their total demise. But I believe that wherever the Word of God and the Spirit of God are honoured, God will always ensure there will be a 'resurrection', and sometimes phenomenal growth in His Church as well.
Among my own recent heroes of the twentieth century are Oswald Chambers, and the triumvirate of Campbell Morgan, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and R.T. Kendall from Westmin­ster Chapel. I am a great admirer of A.W. Tozer and W.E. Sangster; of Billy Graham, through whom I was converted; of Francis Schaeffer who taught me to relate the faith meaningfully to the culture in which I live; of John Stott, John Piper, Terry Virgo and David Pawson. Their spoken words have massively impacted their contemporaries, because they have never failed to let loose the Word of God in all of its primeval power.

So what of the present and the future of preaching in the twenty-first century? John Stott has written this: 'In preaching; God is bringing to each person's notice what holy Scripture has made publicly and permanently available, so that His timeless word comes to timely announcement, so that people believe the message and commit to the Saviour it announces.' 14 This, I am convinced, is the kind of preaching we need to see restored in the Body of Christ today — but there is a war on. There is a conflict for the minds, hearts, and welfare of humankind — particularly of the Church of Jesus Christ. We are at war! The Christian life is not like a war, it is a war, and Satan and his Republican Guard are out to halt our impact and progress in whatever way they can. If Satan cannot kill us directly, then he will try to starve us into weakness and disease, leading to a slow and certain death.
It brings no glory to God when His people are emaciated and weak to the point of withering. The necessity for the fullness of both the Word and the Spirit in church life is a matter for all-out spiritual warfare; something that we must constantly be prepared to fight for. Enemy propaganda has broadcast outright lies for years, telling us that preaching is passe, or that people today are 'Word-resistant'. We are led to believe that people cannot concentrate for more than seven minutes on any spoken
It brings no glory to God when His people are emaciated and weak to the point of withering. The necessity for the fullness of both the Word and the Spirit in church life is a matter for all-out spiritual warfare; 

What we need, they say, is entertainment, dialogue, fun! Let's bring in the soft lighting and smoke machines! Let's keep the people entertained!
We don't need more entertainment though the best preaching is truly entertaining, in the highest sense of the word, but we do need more authentic preaching that changes lives. If Christianity expands primarily through preaching, then if preaching disappears we will grow pale and sicken. Whole churches will eventually disappear from the map. The world could go to hell without a single soul being alert to the fact, or even strong enough to care.
In any war we need weapons; weapons that are clean, Well maintained, loaded, and fully functioning. How tragic, then, that we often appear to be firing blanks. It was said of the evangelist Charles Finney that when he opened his mouth he was aiming a gun and when he spoke the bombardment began. But we often engage in play fighting, firing corks from pop-guns, or making a noise with harmless caps and paintball repeaters. There may be a lot of smoke in connection with such activities, but there is definitely no fire!
Even within the 'best' of circles – the evangelical and Charismatic streams that once -experienced such vigour and health – preaching has fallen on hard times. It is partly due to
many critics voicing their opinions about preaching, and tragically we are believing them. But mostly the problem lies with leaders themselves. A catalogue of reasons could be given for the neglect of this as a priority activity in the ministry of God's leaders in His Church, but here are some suggestions why I think preaching is ailing today:
WHY PREACHING IS AILING
1. Some are too busy
Our schedules are jam-packed with programmes, people, networking, and socialising, so that time in the study has become either scarce or non-existent amid our hectic lifestyles.
2. Some are too lazy
Never begrudge the demanding work that good preaching entails. John Stott has said that
least one full hour of direct preparation is necessary for every five minutes of spoken utterance in the pulpit. He may well have underestimated that; he certainly hasn't overestimated Those who are too lazy to give that amount of time to preparation will
find that their preaching suffers.
3. Some are too ambitious
It is possible to fall into the trap of climbing some imaginary ecclesiastical ladder of success which demands a lot of time spent networking with people, at the expense of direct preparation. Such people may eventually discover that the ladder they have been climbing

What we need, they say, is entertainment, dialogue, fun! Let's bring in the soft lighting and smoke machines! Let's keep the people entertained!
We don't need more entertainment though the best preaching is truly entertaining, in the highest sense of the word, but we do need more authentic preaching that changes lives. If Christianity expands primarily through preaching, then if preaching disappears we will grow pale and sicken. Whole churches will eventually disappear from the map. The world could go to hell without a single soul being alert to the fact, or even strong enough to care.
In any war we need weapons; weapons that are clean, Well maintained, loaded, and fully functioning. How tragic, then, that we often appear to be firing blanks. It was said of the evangelist Charles Finney that when he opened his mouth he was aiming a gun and when he spoke the bombardment began. But we often engage in play fighting, firing corks from pop-guns, or making a noise with harmless caps and paintball repeaters. There may be a lot of smoke in connection with such activities, but there is definitely no fire!
Even within the 'best' of circles – the evangelical and Charismatic streams that once
perienced such vigour and health – preaching has fallen on hard times. It is partly due to
many critics voicing their opinions about preaching, and tragically we are believing -.em. But mostly the problem lies with leaders themselves. A catalogue of reasons could be given for the neglect of this as a priority activity in the ministry of God's leaders in His Church, but here are some suggestions why I think preaching is ailing today:
4. Some are too nervous
Some ministers are simply too afraid to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, perhaps for fear of being disliked or alienated by their congregations.
5. Some are too polite and too politically correct
In the name of political correctness it is possible for the message to be so diluted that it leaves the congregation a sentence or two short of really hearing the truth; short of being rattled or offended at times, because the preacher feels it is too dangerous to do this. But doesn't the Bible tell us repeatedly that biblical ministry is not for the cowardly?
6. Some are too distracted
Perhaps they have many leisure pursuits, meals out, time with friends, time on the golf course, spectator sports and relaxation to timetable into their diaries. Well, they all have a 11 A place, but they are not our priority.
7. Some are too hard of hearing
In other words, waxy deposits have formed in their spiritual ears. In some cases they have been deafened by the booming, strident voices of men and their opinions, so that they become, in effect, stone deaf to the Spirit of God. It requires real sensitivity to hear what God would say in any situation; for some that faculty has been mislaid along the way.
8. Some are disillusioned
Under-developed preaching skills, little or no feedback of a positive nature from others, meagre results and the weariness of a constant struggle have taken their toll on many discouraged ministers, desperate for a personal renewal.
SO, WHY PREACH?
In the face of all this, one might well ask, why preach at all? Consider this: the devil would like to silence the preaching of the Word, precisely because good preaching is so effective. If the devil wants us to shut up, and he does, there must therefore be a very good reason for us to keep on speaking.
In 2 Timothy chapter 4, anticipating social conditions similar to those I have just described, the apostle Paul wrote to his apostolic protege, Timothy. It was to be his swan-song letter, written from the place of his final imprisonment in Rome. It is Paul's lasting legacy to the Church. The context for Paul's statements was the growing battle for truth that was being waged, even in his day. Deception and lies were threatening the spiritual health of the congregations he had planted, and of others too. Paul said that such lies and deception would characterise the last days, the whole period from Christ's first to His second advent.

Paul warned us in 2 Timothy 3: 1 that in the last days there will be 'terrible' times. The
Greek word used here was also used of the Gadarene demoniac in the Gospels and depicts
a condition of violence, of menacing, of times that are deranged and disordered that will be deadly to man. The evil one,says Paul, is going to use apostate men to drain the heart and life out of t:he Church of God - but thankfully there is a wonderful antidote. God has given us His Word, the holy Scriptures, and in 2 Timothy 3:15-16 he reminds Timothy of converting .g power in his life:-

from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you
wise for salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration  of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equippd for every good work.
NKJVPaul speaks in glowing terms of the eternal attributes of God's written Word. He speaks of the Bible's
inspiration in verse 16. Its origin is in God; it is God-breathed - the 4 God's spoken Word. What Scripture says, God says. All modern-day preachers must recover their confidence in the potency of God's Word. His Word is - Paul says, to teach, to correct, to reprove, and to build one up in righteousness. The Bible possesses the divine power to change a person's life. It is capable of making damaged individuals progressively whole, over time.

Paul speaks of the sufficiency of God's Word in verse 17: 'that the man of may be
thoroughly equipped for every good work.' The Bible is complete in itself and needs no supplementation by the thoughts and ideas of men to accomplish the purpose for which it it is a complete tool kit containing all the resources to accomplish everything  God wants us to  to know and to do. But in order to accomplish this, the Bible must be loosed,set free,understood, and accurately  applied to whole churches and the whole lives of the people within them. Then Scripture is able to have its powerful effect. This is why  the apostle issues the following charge to Timothy:

In the Presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: Preach the Word;
Be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage - with great
patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears aside rom the truth and turn aside to myths. But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.
(2 Timothy 4:1-5)

THE APOSTLE PAUL'S CHARGE TO US
There are five things to notice about Paul's charge:
1. It is a solemn and serious charge (v. 1)
We usually pay careful attention to people's last words, especially when they come from a cell on death row, which is where Paul was incarcerated, but this adds a peculiar solemnity to what he is communicating here. Paul describes preaching as an activity that is done in the presence of no less a person than the triune God Himself. The charge to preach, therefore, is heaven-sent — it is not simply a good idea, it is a God idea! His criticism of our efforts in this regard is the only one that really matters. History is coming to a terrifying climax with the sudden appearance of history's Lord and Judge. Paul's single-minded fixation, therefore, is that we all preach the Word, while time allows.
2. It is a perpetual and timely charge (v. 2a)
So vital is it that the truth of the gospel be broadcast through human lips that Paul makes it clear that it is not merely an occasional or casual work we can do when we feel like it. Paul says we are to do it whether it is appropriate or not. There are only two times, he says, when you should preach the Word: in season and out of season — which is another way of saying, always. There is no closed season for preaching. It is always 'open season' on saints and sinners alike!
3. It is an all-out and manly charge (v. 2b) Paul is using a range of exhortations that we can sum up with a few vivid adverbs:
· We are to preach the word urgently, or as J.B. Phillips translates it, 'Never lose your sense of urgency.'
· We are to preach the word relevantly. Every word we utter is to be appropriate to the audiences we address. The preacher's task is to straighten out crooked thinking. An endless barrage of propaganda has fed people's minds. Thank God there's something more powerful in the hour we address them: the Word of God. We are reproving lapsed morals and bad choices, so yes, people need rebuking! Do it lovingly, yes, but do it! We are stirring up discouraged, timid, fearful and wobbling hearts. We are setting a course for new lives and new lifestyles. We do not preach to ceilings or to seats: we preach heart to heart and eye to eye to the people before us.
· We are to preach the Word persistently with the patience and careful instruction that Paul enjoins here. We realise that this is slow, cumulative work, and not all the results are instant. However, we must refuse to become disillusioned,
just because things haven't changed this month. We must refuse to adopt human pressure techniques or quick-fix gimmicks which seem to be on offer at every major conference we attend. Remember, the results of this are in God's hands.
4. It is a comprehensive charge (v. 3a)
It involves the whole truth and nothing but the truth. 'The truth' is found throughout the sixty-six books of the Bible, not just in our favourite texts or pet themes. Therefore, to preach the Word means to preach the whole Bible: its narrative, its wisdom literature, its prophecy, its poetry, the Gospels, the epistles. We must preach from wherever God shows us to whomever He sends us, with the message He has given us and with the power He lends us. That was Paul's burden and it must become ours as well.
5. It is a strongly resisted charge (v. 3b)
Finally, Paul warns us solemnly that some people cannot and will not tolerate the fact that we are determined to preach the Word faithfully. They will hate both us and what we have to say, and they may be confused in their own minds as to which they really hate most. Paul knew this would be the case, because there will arise people who are intolerant of sound truth and they will sponsor false teachers to instruct them and pay them generously to do so. 'Itching ears' can always find someone to scratch them if the price is right. That's why Dr John White once said, 'Christ weeps over sheep fed on lollipops.'
There are only two reactions to good preaching: receptivity or resistance. There is no neutrality. The same sun' that melts wax, hardens clay. The problem is not with the sunshine, the problem is with the substance it shines upon. It is a fact that as a preacher, you will not always be popular, and for this reason in 2 Timothy 4:5 Paul encourages us: `Always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil your ministry', as the English Standard Version puts it. Paul is saying the same thing to us today. It may be prudent for us to shut up, to tone it down, to toe the line, but we do not have that option. We have a ministry and a charge to fulfil that the triune God Himself has called us to engage in.
So this is our great task now in the twenty-first century as it was Paul's and Timothy's in the first century AD. Christ is the one who issued it. He is also the one who will fully assess our faithfulness to this task and reward it accordingly. So, whether people love you or hate you, whether they receive you or resist you, whether you see great results or very few at all, do it anyway.
William Willimon, chaplain of Duke University in Carolina, is one who has truly recovered, I believe, the sense of awe appropriate to the task God has commissioned us to do. He says,

In that moment when the congregation settles itself in the pews and all is quiet and expectant as the people look to you, you are the preacher, the essential link between them and the good news. Without you the good news is not news. No one hears or believes it. Call it a burden, call it a privilege, a duty. You know that it is worthy of your best talents, worthy of a lifetime's labour and dedication. On any Sunday you can give it your all and still know that the Word deserves more. It is no small task that the Church has set upon your shoulders. Being called to preach the gospel, you can do no more than to promise as long as you have breath, and there is someone to listen, then by God's grace you will give them the Word. 15
Amen.   END OF FIRST CHAPTER
--------------------------------------------------------------
CHRIS writes
In that moment when the congregation settles itself in the pews and all is quiet and expectant as the people look to you, you are the preacher, the essential link between them and the good news. 
 That very sentence is made within previously accepted paradigms...

  • That there is a congregation as such, 
  • that it is gathered to hear a speaker
  • that there be a main speaker with a prepared spiel
  • that this man is probably the pyramid leader of the assembled people, or the invited guest of such.

    Preaching is definitely a constant...it is a manner of Spirit speech....it declares and calls into being the Kingdom. But as to all the other paraphernalia, I  am just not sure.