George Whitefield became famous for his highly dramatic style of preaching, aiming at the heart and mind of the working class man, as he taught what the Bible said. He did not merely want to interest or amuse. He wanted people to feel that their souls were at stake.

He also employed the latest communications technology – cheap print and newspapers – to publicise his ministry and itinerary and the gospel he preached. The American publisher of his sermons, Benjamin Franklin, did not believe, but loved to hear Whitefield because his conviction was so clear.

He preached not only in church pulpits, but also to massive crowds of thousands in the outdoors. His first outdoor sermon was delivered at the age of just 24 to coalminers near Bristol, England. He preached to prisoners in jails, but also to lords and ladies. He would go anywhere to preach the gospel of God’s grace, of justification from our sins in Christ alone. Despite the dangers of sailing in those times and with only average health, he crossed the Atlantic thirteen times to bring the gospel to the American colonies.

Yet despite his entrepreneurial methods, he firmly believed in the power of the Holy Spirit, and that conversation was only ever due to God’s electing grace. This was something that led to deep disagreement with John Wesley, his older contemporary in outdoors preaching, the father of Methodism, who sadly denounced him over this.

Like all Christian leaders, he had his blind spots. His relationship with his wife was limited by relentless travels. And in his 30s, he agreed that perhaps some of his earlier preaching had been over the top and overly harsh; more of his spirit than the Spirit of God.

His greatest blindspot was his support of race-based slavery. In the colony of Georgia, he advocated slavery in order to make the impressive orphanage he ran more affordable, and so to care for greater numbers. So when it was legalized there he became a slave owner. Yet he also infuriated slave-owners by insisting on both evangelizing and educating the black slaves. He insisted they had souls, something others denied. He sowed the seeds of emancipation since the gospel said that in Christ they could become children of God, which would mean that they were brothers and sisters to the owners (Gal 3:28). Others could see this would also undermine the whole system. And it is said that when he died in America, he was mourned most by black Americans. Yet he himself remained blind to the contradiction of buying and selling slaves.

By 1740, when George Washington was just 8, he had become the most famous man in America. One biographer, Harry Stout, styled him as America’s first cultural hero. His latest biographer, Thomas Kidd, argues he was the key figure in the first generation of Anglo-American evangelical Christianity. Certainly he preceded Jonathan Edwards (John Piper’s theological hero), who wept at his preaching, as the leader of the Great Awakening.

His life was one of almost daily preaching. Sober estimates are that he spoke about 1,000 times every year for 30 years, sermons, lectures, and talks. That included at least 18,000 sermons and 12,000 talks and exhortations.

Whitefield said,

I know no other reason why Jesus has put me into the ministry, than because I am the chief of sinners, and therefore fittest to preach free grace to a world lying in the wicked one.

Sources: I am indebted to the following articles for my very derivative work!

• John Piper, “I will not be a velvet-tongued preacher“
• Thomas Kidd, “America’s Spiritual Founding Father: Whitefield’s Life and Legacy, Credo Magazine, 4/3 July 2014, pp20-27
• God’s Anointed Barnstormer: Lee Gatiss explains the Holy Violence of Whitefield’s Preaching, Credo Magazine, 4/3 July 2014, pp14-18

The edition of Credo Magazine referenced just above featured more articles on Whitefield (link here to ISSUU and PDF options)

Courtesy: Tim Challies, challies.com

Mightn’t it be true that sometimes God lowers our standard of living to raise the standard of our giving!?

This meme is one where I feel very ambivalent (see original at end of this post). I normally like Tim Challies‘ illustrated quotes. And I understand Alcorn is a solid evangelical. And I know nothing of the context of this thought Challies has featured from Alcorn’s works. [* see below for update.] No doubt he says much that’s good. 

And no doubt the Bible talks about prosperity and plenty at times. And if we prosper, we should be generous.

But still I get nervous about prosperity talk. And I want to push back on this quote.

I am thinking of the widow’s mite, of course, in Mark 12:41-44. 

I am thinking of the Macedonians’ generosity, in 2 Corinthians 8:2, and following.

Just pause a moment and actually look the references up! Their generosity welled up in the context of a severe trial that God willed for them.

I am also thinking of an architect I knew, whose income fluctuated widely depending on business, who always insisted on putting something in the offertory bag even when there was no income (or negative income through continuing business expenses), and was (I believe) still generous when a big job paid off.

We learn dependence on God when our income goes down. We learn to live simply. We are tested to discover whether we can still keep being generous to others.

And conversely I am thinking that sometimes greater riches are a great danger (1 Timothy 6:9)!

Proverbs 30:8-9

…give me neither poverty nor riches, but give me only my daily bread.
Otherwise, I may have too much and disown you and say, ‘Who is the LORD?’…

+++

* UPDATE: A friend supplied this photo from Alcorn’s book for context, under a heading called “When God prospers us, why?” which occurswithin a chapter refuting prosperity theology.

I also appreciate Tim Challies taking the time to comment below graciously and pointing me to the context of the quote. Totally fair enough.

It’s accompanied by the claim that Facebook is banning Christians from sharing pictures like this and so we should all protest by sharing the image.

Firstly, please pause to note the irony that you read the information and saw the picture via the medium which is supposed to have banned it!

But secondly, I wonder that more Christians don’t check their outrage longer in order to fact-check the reliability of the info.

As it happens this meme has been circulating the internet since 2012 – i.e. for at least two Christmases prior to this one! A quick check of the Snopes or Hoax Slayer websites would have de-bunked it.

Given Facebook permits all sorts of rot from both extreme and silly viewpoints, is this allegation of censorship of Christians really plausible? Or does it just make us seems unduly sensitive and gullible?

Proverbs 23:23 says:

Buy the truth and do not sell it; get wisdom, discipline and understanding.

Lets save our energies for genuine and serious cases of censorship and persecution. Once again the advice to ignore it seems worth considering.

[P.S. To all my dear friends I have already ‘chipped’ for passing this meme on, I am not mad at you. I’m not trying to embarrass you personally. The fact so many committed and thoughtful Christians have passed it on shows that it’s an easy mis-step to make in the social media space. (I’ve made a few of my own!) I’d just like to help us avoid similar mistakes more often in the future.]

Photo: istockphoto.com

I’m not marketer, but I’ve heard more than once there’s no such thing as bad publicity. I guess there’s exceptions to the rule, but not too often when you are trying to get your product onto people’s radar.

In recent times, my digital friends, mostly Christian but also others with a moral compass, have protested against:

• a computer game which apparently involves running women over with cars;
• the screening on TV of an American football variant which involves women wearing skimpy underwear as the competition uniform;
• the visit of some sort of dating coach to Australia with offensive views about women.

In each case, the suggested protest involves sharing the link to a blog critique or petition site. And this almost always involves Facebook picking up as its preview the picture of the very person or practice you are protesting against!

In each case, until then I had been barely aware of the product, if not completely unaware, so I’m sorry if I got a detail wrong.

But as the protest spread in that viral digital way, I kept getting the image shoved in my face through my Facebook feed. Ironically it was by my friends, who don’t want this sort of thing being promoted!

Counter-productively, this can lead your friends into temptations we might not otherwise have faced. (“I might just click on that link to find out how bad it is…”) At the very least, it can become an unwelcome distraction.

Here’s a couple of alternatives.

1. Ignore it. Don’t give it any air. Don’t give it any extra publicity. Being ignored is a promoter’s nightmare, so help make it a flop and ignore the offensive product.

I wonder if the wisdom of Proverbs 26:20 could sometimes be applicable here.

Without wood a fire goes out; without gossip a quarrel dies down.

2. Keep the image out of it. If you must share a protest, then encourage the protest in a way that does not keep bringing the offensive image to everyone’s attention. Risk that you won’t get the visual hook. Or use a different image that does not serve to highlight the product or person you are protesting.

Trust that the merits of the case you outline without a sensational image will persuade people to join you.

Naïve, I know.

I guess I am struggling with how to apply Ephesians 5:11-12 –

Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to mention what the disobedient do in secret.

Some of these things need to be exposed. But the Apostle says that sometimes the details should not be mentioned, let alone inadvertently promoted.

And context suggests that most of all, it’s the gospel light of Jesus that should do the exposing.

Here, courtesy of Jon Baird, is an extract from an interview conducted back in March, in Ken’s home of Kiama, for Jon’s 4^th year project at Moore College.

JB: Moving on to theology, as you said with Archbishop Loane being very strongly Reformed, during your time as Bishop were there any notable shifts in theology that you saw impacting the region?

KS: Not shifts on theology – not on my watch!! (Laughs.) One of the things that did happen was, I had a vision. Don’t misunderstand me. I had a sense that the region was ripe for some form of evangelistic crusade.

It was still in the days of Billy Graham. So I myself visited every pastor of every denomination in the Wollongong area and invited them to a meeting with a view to try and get an evangelistic crusade going. It took a bit of a while. But the end result was that we had Leighton Ford, who was Billy Graham’s brother-in-law, come for a 10 day crusade with his team. We had it in Wollongong Town Hall.

So theologically there was a strong emphasis on evangelism and a number of people – you don’t keep numbers – but a number of people did respond to the Spirit of God, and turn to him in repentance and faith.

We had a fair bit of increase at some of the churches. Those that put the most into it got the most out of it, of course. That wasn’t a change in theology, but it was a sense of God’s Spirit moving among us.

JB: What were the challenges that you found to the role of Bishop?

KS: The first one that jumps into my mind, which wasn’t the first highest priority, was travel. I was doing at least 50,000 km a year, just sitting behind the wheel. That was year after year after year.

You’d go to Jannali for a Confirmation. The next day you’d be at Ulladulla or you’d be at Bowral. That was one of the challenges.

Another challenge was I realised that when I was made a bishop, that part of the Ordinal was that I teach. So I took the responsibility, or tried to take the opportunity, for teaching the Scriptures, in addition to what was going on in the parishes.

So I suppose that for about 6 years, I’d prepare a series of 4 or 5 Bible studies on a book. Then I would organise through the deaneries that I’d go and take a teaching session on this book in the deanery on, say, 5 consecutive Wednesday nights. I’d do 5 or 6 deaneries a year.

And it was very exciting. We used to get 100-120 people to come to a Bible Study on 4 or 5 consecutive Tuesday nights. That was terrific. God was very kind. That was another challenge – to thoroughly prepare.

With all the travel and then the preparation the next thing that I found that I had to really allocate time for pastoring my brother clergy. So what I used to do was I’d say to my secretary, “Here are 10 half days – you marry them with 10 blokes.” So I would spend hopefully the best part of half a day with a rector [= ‘senior pastor’].

And we’d talk together not just about what he was doing. But we’d talk about preaching programs, family life, what his day off meant, how he kept spiritual health, and how he prayed. They were pretty personal questions, but I thought, “If I’m going to encourage people then you have to ask these sorts of questions.”

That was a challenge too, to keep going and keep going.

I like administration and so I had to pull back and make sure that the area of pastoral care got enough attention.

In the midst of all this was family life. Our eldest daughter was married just before we came – she’s Simon Manchester’s wife. Then we had two – a son and a daughter down here. David would come in and talk about stuff, because he was the youth worker at St Michael’s. And our younger daughter was at school. It was pretty important… I concede that family life is very important. It mustn’t be squeezed out, nor must it become dominant. I think you’ve got to hold those two together.

I think keeping up with my reading and make sure it’s important. When some of the clergy found it hard going, if they’d had a bit of a prang, you’d spend a lot of time encouraging them – encouraging them in their preaching and this and that.

I was always anxious to have a missionary approach, having spent 10 years as a missionary ourselves in Tanzania. That was not a very strong – it didn’t work like the way I would have liked. But things happened.

…A missionary approach in the churches, because some churches are inward looking. They don’t have a go-into-all-the-world mentality.

Perhaps the highlight was Reg Hanlon who was the rector of West Wollongong. His theology was, if you obey by encouraging your congregation to be looking outward, then God is no man’s debtor and the local parish won’t be left high and dry. So he started supporting missionaries, by prayer, having them come, by finance, and I think that after about 4-5 years, it was something like 35 missionaries were being supported. The local income had doubled, and missionary income was 10 times. It was really quite staggering figures.

But he had quite a bit of opposition at the beginning. People would say, “Ah no, we can’t support this local missionary because the finances will dry up.” He said “You believe me, if we go the way the bible tells us to go, God will do it”. And as I say, the income from the local church at least doubled, if not more – quadrupled perhaps!

To see evangelism going on. I have a feeling these days that I don’t see as much evangelism going on and it worries me. That is, eyeballing people, and talking to them about coming to faith. Not saying, “Are you saved?” …But being willing to talk with them, to bring them to a point where they see their need of the Lord Jesus and come to commit themselves to him.

The whole bit of Romans 1:18 is so important. I’m sure I’ll think of more things as we go along, but that’s enough for now.

[Transcript very lightly edited for clarity in reading.]

+++

From 2015, Jon Baird will be the FOCUS worker with overseas students at the University of Wollongong. You can find out more about supporting Jon here.

William Romaine, courtesy: New Focus http://go-newfocus.co.uk

William Romaine was born 300 years ago, 25 September, 1714 , in Durham, UK.

J.C. Ryle featured Romaine as one of his lesser known pastors in his Christian Leaders of the 18th Century, an excellent and approachable series of short biographical studies.

Romaine’s father was a Huguenot who’d taken refuge in England from persecution in Catholic France. After school, Romaine took an MA at Oxford, immersed in literature, and left a fine scholar and a well-read man.

From the time of Romaine’s ordination in the Church of England, he preached clear and unmistakeable evangelical doctrine. Unlike many clergy in his day, he had nothing to unlearn!

He was curate of Banstead, near Epsom, Chaplain to an Alderman of London, visiting preacher in St Paul’s Cathedral and other London pulpits. After this period, his bags were backed to leave London and return northwards, when an invitation to apply for the lectureship of St Botolph’s, Billingsgate – don’t you love the names – meant he was not lost to city ministry.

Soon after he also obtained the evening lectureship of St Dunstan’s, Fleet Street. But the Rector opposed him and the Churchwardens refused the many people who wanted to hear him easy access. Eventually the Bishop of London intervened, and for 46 years, Romaine retained this role and edified those who came to hear him.

To make ends meet, Romaine occupied various roles over the years, even as a Professor of Astronomy for a short time!

His well-known scholarship commanded respect as Assistant morning preacher at St George’s Hanover Square, one of the most prominent pulpits of London, in the West End. Yet his bold declaration of the gospel of Christ and denunciation of fashionable sins were uncompromising. Five years later the Rector kicked him out because the regular upper class pew-holders didn’t like the crowds attracted by his preaching.

He was into his fifties without a full-time position! Finally, he became chaplain to Lady Huntingdon, and, through her influence, was appointed Rector of St Anne’s Blackfriars, his first full time incumbency, which he occupied for 29 more years.

He was not an especially genial man, and could be irritable. He sometimes had to apologise for his abruptness. He was known to say to those who sought his counsel privately that he’d said all he had to say in the pulpit!

But as rector of a key London parish, Romaine became a rallying point for all in London who loved evangelical truth in the Church of England. With his undeniable learning he took up the cudgels against error and in defence of biblical truth.

At 81, Romaine was still preaching three days each week. During his final illness, he thanked a friend for a visit, saying that, “he had come to see a saved sinner”. He wanted the words of the publican (i.e. tax collector) to be found on his lips when he died: “God be merciful to me, a sinner!” Not long before his death in 1795, he commented to a friend from another denomination, “There is but one central point, in which we must all meet­ – Jesus Christ and him crucified.”

My limited experience with biographies from this earlier era shows they are often intensely interested in a person’s last words, finding them indicative of the convictions that drive a person. Ryle reports that the last words Romaine said to the host of the home where he was being nursed, was that, “He [Jesus] is a precious Saviour to me now.” And to the Lord, he was heard to say, “Holy! holy! holy blessed Jesus! to thee be endless praise,” not long before he breathed his last.

In his sketch of the leaders of 18^th century evangelical awakening, Ryle likens the famous names of Wesley and Whitefield to spiritual cavalry crossing the countryside preaching.

But he said Romaine was a commander of heavy artillery, who held a citadel in the heart of the metropolis, London. Unlike the itinerants, Romaine could not preach old sermons. But, watched by unfriendly eyes, he taught, unflinchingly in the city, as he testified to the gospel of grace.

Ryle commented,

“Well it would be for the Churches, if in this respect there were more evangelical ministers who walked in the steps of Romaine. Grace and soundness in the faith, diligence and personal piety, are undoubtedly the principal thing. But book-learning ought not to be despised. An ignorant and ill-read ministry, in days of intellectual activity, must sooner or later fall into contempt.”

His friends and relatives intended to give him a private funeral, presumably in line with his wishes. But this proved impossible, since, Ryle, writes, “the many hearers of a minister who had preached the gospel in London for forty-five years could not be prevented showing their respect by following him to the grave. Scores looked up to him as their spiritual father. Hundreds venerated his character and consistency, even though they did not fully embrace the gospel he had preached.”

As a consequence his funeral became a very public one, with fifty coaches following the hearse from Clapham Common and a multitude on foot, with city marshals with their men dressed in ceremonial garb, ordered out by the Lord Mayor of London, riding the last leg from Blackfriars’ Bridge, before the hearse, escorting his body to the church.

He had died like a good soldier at his post.

Recently a friend suggested that Australian churches should consider an Anti-Gambling Sunday like in the United States (September 21). As the Americans said, “Gambling, at any level, is an investment in trouble.”

My friend may possibly have noticed I have a bee-in-my-bonnet on this issue, and so expected a warm endorsement!

Economist.com/graphicdetail, 3 February 2014

In fact, I absolutely despise poker-machines and the damage they do, especially to problem gamblers and their helpless families. And the National Council of Church in Australia has suggested this coming ‘Social Justice Sunday’ (September 28), should be dedicated to raising awareness of the dreadful impact of gambling in Australia. Statistics they cite from The Economist, shows that Australians are the world’s biggest gamblers losing over $1000 per adult per annum, which is more than twice the rate in the USA. Only Singaporeans come close to us.

But for all that, I doubt it’s a good idea to populate our Sunday services and sermons with special themes.

As a pastor with a real interest in social issues, here are few reasons for resisting the push towards more and more special theme days.

1. Christians – because we care – will want to keep adding to the list of special Sundays: gambling, indigenous reconciliation, domestic abuse, abortion, racism, refugees, marriage, poverty, pornography and … each one is important and you could keep the list going. But making each one a set feature every year can inadvertently reinforce the message of moralism – that we are mainly on about a series of moral and social issues.

And that’s not the gospel of Jesus, but the gospel’s fruit. And we must never forget it.

2. If one then shapes the preaching to the theme for the special Sunday, more than very occasionally, you undermine the systematic expository preaching pattern that I think is generally preferable as the bread and butter method of a church’s public teaching life.

3. It can lead to tokenism; we all do a number of these special Sundays to ‘tick the box’ of our moral and social conscience. But we don’t really take the time to engage our people deeply on each issue. It’s generally just not possible in the space of a single Sunday to do more much more than awareness raising.

4. I suspect that real progress in terms of ‘campaigning’ on issues like these happens by individual opinion leaders – whether keen church members or pastors – keeping the pressure on, writing, blogging, lobbying, politicking, with occasional big public efforts seeking to draw the masses in.

As a pastor with responsibility for preaching programs, I know how hard it is to get a good expository series going, organising series break up, making it fit the school term pattern, and so on. If the series then gets interrupted a couple of times with special issue Sundays, so much momentum can be lost.

I think I’d prefer to schedule occasional topical or doctrinal series to deal with social and moral issues. For example, we’ve had a good return with a very occasional 4-5 week break from the sequential expository stuff for “issues facing Christians today”, or “the ethics of life, death and the bits in between”.

Or if I am to have a one-off on gambling or abortion or racism or refugees or the definition of marriage, I’d often prefer the freedom to fit it into natural breaks in the preaching program, rather than the inflexibility of being tied to fixed special purpose Sundays annually on the 3^rd weekend in September or whenever! One should also be alert to seize the opportunity when the passage next in your sequence of expositions gives a natural chance to apply God’s Word to the contemporary social issue.

Of course, if for particular historical reasons, it fits your church to go with a few of these special purpose Sundays important to your culture, then by all means. But do remember, there are other ways of managing it, than just turning over the sermon. It could be by more extended attention to the subject in prayer, by a Minister’s letter in the church bulletin, or perhaps by a well-prepared interview with a member.

And definitely, in my opinion, resist the temptation for the multiplication of special issue Sundays. What do you think?

Lun ellin Jehovah an pornum an Narrinyeri: pempir ile ityan kinauwe Brauwarate, ungunuk korn wurruwarrin ityan, nowaiy el itye moru hellangk, tumbewarrin itye kaldwamp.

You have just read the most famous verse of the Bible, John 3:16. It’s most likely the sentence translated into more languages than any other sentence ever written.

Here you are reading it from the first Scriptures published in an Australian indigenous language – Ngarrindjeri. And 2014 is the 150^th anniversary of that publication in 1864. The full title was Tungarar Jehovald; Extracts from the Holy Scriptures in the language of the tribes inhabiting the lakes and lower Murray and called Ngarrindjeri (Narrinyeri) and English.

It included extracts from Genesis, Exodus, Matthew and John, along with the Lord’s Prayer. The introductory page states it comes “From the Translation of Mr George Taplin, Missionary Agent of the Aborigines’ Friends’ Association, at Point Macleay. First published in 1864 by the South Australian Auxiliary of the British and Foreign Bible Society; reprinted in 1926, with further reprints in 1986, 2009, by The Bible Society S.A.” You can read it online here via Issuu.

If you look on our $50 note, you will see a small church to the left of the portrait of David Unaipon, the famous Ngarrindjeri inventor, spokesman on aboriginal affairs, writer and preacher. (Some of Unaipon’s inventions included an improved hand tool for shearing sheep, and a centrifugal motor, though he was never able to commercialise his ideas.)

The church on the $50 note is located at Point Macleay, or Raukkan in the indigenous language, in the Coorong, South Australia. Here Unaipon’s father, James Ngunaitponi, was based.

James Ngunaitponi

James Ngunaitponi was the first Christian convert of a Scottish Free Church missionary, James Reid, who later drowned. He then laboured with the missionary George Taplin. With Taplin’s enabling, he began a “Scripture readership” among lakeside camps. A Scottish sponsor, Henrietta Smith, paid for a small stone cottage for Ngunaitponi, and for a writing desk, and vested a lifetime annuity of £100 in his name, which helped sustain his work.

Taplin was truly interested in Ngarrindjeri society and culture. He learned their language and used it in preaching. In translating Christian Scriptures into Ngarrindjeri, Taplin relied heavily upon Ngunaitponi. Taplin also published invaluable anthropological studies. His papers on philology and ethnology were acclaimed in Australia and abroad. Despite his sympathy with the local people and their traditions, Taplin believed Christianity should be adopted, and along with it, Europeanization. As a result he helped undermine indigenous social structure and received opposition from conservative tribal members. But they had been dispossessed before his arrival, and by helping them become literate and numerate and to acquire trades he enabled them to survive in European society. Today hundreds of their descendants remain in Australia; their durability can largely be attributed to Taplin.

The Australian Dictionary of Biography concludes,

He was a compassionate Christian and a courageous fighter.

As for James Ngunaitponi, he was the first Aboriginal deacon in the church, and died a respected indigenous leader. We can thank God that they pioneered the first published translation of Scripture into an indigenous Australian language.

Sources:

• http://banknotes.rba.gov.au/biography-david-unaipon.html
• http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/unaipon-james-13227
• http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/taplin-george-4687

How does a pastor handle such things?

To be honest I am a little conflicted.

Those who know me personally will know I am all in favour of prayer for the persecuted saints in Iraq and elsewhere.

I just organised and hosted an interdenominational prayer meeting for Iraq last Saturday. Inspired by Open Doors Australia, and in fellowship with about 45 other venues across Australia, about 100 Christians from Anglican, Baptist, independent Evangelical, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, and Reformed Churches united at St Michael’s Cathedral, Wollongong, to Pray for Iraq.  

However I am also a little anxious that we check our sources carefully, and be cautious about passing on some of the most dramatic reports.

Even back on July 14, when I passed on reports of church buildings being burned in Mosul, it turned out that the pictures supplied in web stories of the ISIS invasion of Mosul, were not of burnt churches in Mosul at all, but of churches in Syria and Egypt that had been burned months and even years earlier, albeit, it appears by Islamic extremists in those places.

Still terrible, but it’s not honest reporting to use pictures from other events and to claim they showed churches were burning in Mosul.

This brings me to the “URGENT PRAYER REQUEST” forwarded to me, by my prayerful and well-meaning parishioners…

Date: 24 August 2014 
Subject: Urgent Prayers needed: Latest ISIS atrocities against Christians 

Urgent Prayer Request / Please Pray  and FAST   –  Such evil needs Fasting as well as Prayers

URGENT PRAYER REQUEST!!!!

Please Pray. ..Fast

BREAKING URGENT NEWS! The email below was sent to Benny Mostert from Jericho Walls:

Dear Friends,

Just a few minutes ago I received the following text message on my phone from Sean Malone who leads Crisis Relief International (CRI). We then spoke briefly on the phone and I assured him that we would share this urgent prayer need with all of our contacts.

“We lost the city of Queragosh (Qaraqosh). It fell to ISIS and they are beheading children systematically. This is the city we have been smuggling food to. ISIS has pushed back Peshmerga (Kurdish forces) and is within 10 minutes of where our CRI team is working. Thousands more fled into the city of Erbil last night. The UN evacuated it’s staff in Erbil. Our team is unmoved and will stay. Prayer cover needed!”

What made me wonder about this email was talk of Qaraqosh falling, and that children are being systematically beheaded.

You see, I’d heard these claims at least a fortnight earlier.

In fact, I know that the fall of Iraq’s largest Christian town, Qaraqosh – terrible and sad event – was reported in mainline media almost three weeks ago, (for example, in The Independent (UK) on 7th August). It’s not something that is just happening now.

And when I googled “Benny Mostert Sean Malone Qaraqosh” I discovered this “urgent prayer request” has been circulating on the internet since at least August 9th. I saw other examples on 12th and 19th August. Some (not all) people even passed it on on those later dates, seeming to imply it was as if they had perhaps just received the text message personally and directly a few minutes earlier. Not good.

In addition, I shared a “Fact Checker” article published on August 12 from Joe Carter at the Gospel Coalition, urging caution on the claims of “systematic beheading of children”.

Carter does not deny atrocities have occurred, even impacting children. But he notes that most of the information is second hand, and that evidence supplied has been very patchy, largely from a single source located in America (but re-quoted numerous times). In some cases, there are demonstrable inaccuracies.

Even the very disturbing report circulating from Canon Andrew White (which I have viewed on Youtube) mentions just one specific atrocity against a child, which it appears Canon White did not witness, but was told about. He says other terrible things are happening, which he does not specify (at least in the video I watched).

Again, take the email above, from others, quoting Mostert, quoting Sean Malone. You’ll note, Malone is reported as saying ISIS troops have come “within 10 minutes of where our CRI team is working”. In other words, it seems logical that his reports of systematic beheadings of children cannot come directly from his Crisis Relief International colleagues, since they are not in the territory controlled by ISIS. The reports must be at least third hand.

Again, as Joe Carter says, there have been terrible atrocities occurring. No doubt there may even be worse ones than we have accurate, first hand and substantiated information about.

You might want to nuance Carter on this or that detail himself. However I find Carter’s conclusion important…

As Christians, we have a duty to champion the truth. We should avoid spreading unsubstantiated claims and inflaming dread and panic by playing on people’s natural disgust of harm to children. ISIS is an organization that has committed heinous acts of violence and violated the human rights of many of our fellow believers. But we must not partake in the spreading of lies, even if it is against our enemies.

Again, read the whole article, and note the C.S. Lewis quote at the end in his last update.

We ought to be often in prayer for persecuted Christians, and also for all down-trodden and abused people, whether or not we know the details.

But we should also be cautious about passing on highly dramatic reports unless we have taken some care to see if they can be verified or corroborated independently.

We should not need extra drama to persuade us to pray!