This is inadequate.  This describes the form, not the substance nor the spirit of biblical Presbyterianism.

Wikipedia has two entries indicating the double usage of the term Presbyterianism, but failing to explain its spirit. One entry applies it to the churches that are governed by Presbyterian policy, and the other entry applies it to presbyteral polity itself, which it defines as “a method of church governance (“ecclesiastical polity”) typified by the rule of assemblies of presbyters, or elders.”

In its main article, Wikipedia states: “Presbyterianism is a historically Reformed Protestant tradition named after its form of church government by representative assemblies of elders, known as “presbyters.”

So, according to Wikipedia, it is “a tradition” determined by its “form of church government”.

This is inadequate. Presbyterianism is more than a form of church government and it is more than a tradition. This inadequate thinking has allowed current Presbyterianism to become legalistic, bureaucratic and quasi-episcopalian.

The nature and spirit of Presbyterianism

The nature or essence of Presbyterianism is the biblical teaching that believers are all members of the body of Christ and as “the eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of thee” 1Cor 12:21 so these believers need to interact with each other in a manner that develops the whole body of Christ Eph 4:11-16 and identifies, employs and develops the gifts and graces of each believer.

This does not mean that there is a free-for-all in the Christian church because Scripture makes it plain that there are ruling elders in the Christian church Heb 13:7,17 known as ‘presbyters’, elders or overseers. These office-bearers commend themselves by “watching for your soul” and they demonstrate this by showing their knowledge and application of Scripture in their personal speech and behaviour, and by their ability to encourage and develop mature Christian behaviour in others.

The term Presbyterianism derives from the biblical term ‘presbyter’ and highlights that there is biblical rule and authority in the Christian church to promote unity and develop Christian behaviour. It corrects any idea that there is no governance in the church. However, it is too easy for presbyters to adopt worldly attitudes Lk 22:24-26 and to “lord it over” God’s heritage 1Pe 5:3. This is the very antithesis of presbyterianism, but it is common.

Presbyters feed the flock of God, willingly and not for money 1Pe 5:1-3. They are exampes to the flock and do not lord themselves over it. They watch for your souls. Such presbyters commend themselves to every man’s conscience.

“But we have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the Word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”

2Corinthians 4:2

Thus, says Peter: “You younger men, submit yourselves to the elder men. Yes, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility: for God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble” 1Pe 5:5. This is the spirit of presbyterianism. 

Presbyteries

At the Presbytery level, the essence of Presbyterianism is the biblical principle to confer and make use of the wisdom of “a multitude of counsellors” to guide the Christian church, extolled three times in the book of Proverbs.

“Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety” Pro 11:14.
“Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established” Pro 15:22.
“For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellors there is safety” Pro 24:6.

This collective wisdom aims to benefit believers at the congregational level, the usual level at which believers operate. However, ecclesiastical structures can become a stepping-stone to self-aggrandisement, seen too often in clerks, moderators, conveners of committees, editors of magazines, treasurers and whatever.

The spirit of Presbyterianism esteems one’s brethren and especially biblical teachers highly in love 1Tim 5:13, considers that others are better than oneself Php 2:3, studies in what respect this is so in order to emulate them Php 2:4, so that the whole body of Christ may grow together Eph 4:11-14 into a profitable and functional congregation of the Lord Num 16:3, Num 27:17, Jos 22:16, considering that one might be mistaken and thus requiring to confer with others using the biblical principles of Christian prayerful discussion and the application of Scripture to one’s Christian behaviour.

Abuse of church authority

Too often the spirit of Presbyterianism is abandoned in favour of “following my leader”, even in presbyterian churches.

Episcopacy and Independent governance do not follow these principles, far less does “Diotrephes who loves to have the preeminence” 3Jn 1:9, a spirit that may found in any Christian group. Episcopacy plainly contradicts the Presbyterian spirit and Independency is simply quasi-episcopacy “writ small”, with large fishes in smaller ponds.

The Roman catholic pope in Rome has gone further and usurped the position of Christ as Head of the Church and of the Holy Spirit as the unifying spirit of the Church. Presbyterian biblical unity is the answer to papal, imposed uniformity and subservience.

Inconsistency

The Church of Christ is not perfect and inconsistency abounds. An episcopalian or independent Christian may behave as a presbyterian in spirit although worshipping in an inconsistent setting. Similarly, many presbyterians worship in presbyterian churches where the minister or a significant elder may throw their supposed weight about like Dioterphes. This is why church government alone does not ensure a balanced Christian congregation, but why the spirit of Presbyterianism is so important for a healthy congregation.

The word ‘Presbyterianism’ derives from the biblical ‘presbyter’ and not everyone is a presbyter. However, the biblical principles of a presbyter are what makes the spirit of Presbyterianism. They rule well and do not have an over-inflated opinion of themselves. The apostle Peter, rather than calling himself the bishop of Rome, and we have no evidence that he was ever in Rome, called himself an elder ‘a co-presbuteros‘ 1Pe 5:1. He goes on to say: “Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock” 1Pe 5:2-3.  The pretended successor of Peter in Rome could learn from this instead of lording it over others.

Christian debate uses biblical exegesis to solve disputes, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, and as the New Testament epistles demonstrate. This is why Sola Scriptura developed as a Reformed mantra in the 16th-century European Reformation. It explains why Rabbinic Judaism and Roman catholic biblical exegesis is so wide of the biblical mark, relying on their respective oral traditions.

Personal application of the Presbyterian spirit to all Christians

Presbyterianism enables a Christian believer to respect Christians in other denominations, to benefit them and to benefit from them, but not to be subservient to them Gal 5:1.

On this principle John Calvin of Geneva conferred with Thomas Cranmer, the Archbishop of Canterbury, not because he was a royally-appointed archbishop but because Calvin recognized him as a fellow-presbyter.

We would do well to pay attention to the spirit of Presbyterianism and reform current Presbyterianism.

The religion of politics is preached by politicians who promise equality, justice and peace on Earth and young people are duped into believing them.

This is not a religion about the salvation of one’s soul but about the improvement of one’s bodily and social condition. Many people prefer this religion, especially young people.

Once hooked by their preachers, these young people rarely change their religion. Occasionally they may change their political party, but their religion is still about their social conditions.

Teenagers often form life-long opinions at this stage in their life.  Pride prevents them changing their opinion, so it is quite alarming to think that one’s lifelong pathway is determined by teenage opinions and decisions.

When their politics fails to provide what they want, they may change their party.  They do not often change their religion.  Some brave souls do; the rest make do, excusing their disappointments on one thing or another. but not their religion.

The only Person Who will not fail you is your God, Who has patiently waited for you to seek Him through all the failures in your life.  He will not wait for ever but He has given you many intimations of His presence.

Will you turn to Him while there is time?

Various scandals have not helped the public perception of the Corporation, from the top downwards.

When veteran John Humphrys retired from the BBC flagship Today programme, hardly 24 hours had passed before he criticized the BBC’s “liberal bias”.

BBC partiality can be seen in its regular use of pejorative terms applied liberally to public figures, such as “far right”, etc.

It keeps reminding its audience that Tommy Robinson’s real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon. What point is it trying to make? It does not remind its audience that the leader of the Green Party Zack Polansky’s real name is David Paulden. What is the point? Does it not know that Robinson adopted a pseudonym for his own safety and then it became his inevitable branding? What is the point behind this innuendo?

On the subject of safety, BBC is joining the media uproar over Nigel Farage’s finances, although Farage evidently needs to pay security for his own safety. The Good Book says: “he shall have judgment without mercy who has shown no mercy” James 2:13 but few people consider the judgment of God.

The pressure on Farage has provoked him into appealing to the public through a by-election.

This BBC grammar compares with what used to be taught in British schools: “in which he says he will stand”.

BBC standards are slipping. Partiality is one thing, and slipping standards is another. Each points to a culture of mediocrity at the BBC. It may be skilled in media presentation and the dark arts of worldly politics but we expect more from the national broadcaster, not least impartiality, objectivity and truth. Are they listening?

This short blogpost will serve as springboard for further examples of BBC bias as and when they are drawn to my attention.

Updates:

9 Jul 2026: the BBC continues the tendency of attaching “holy” to various islamic items. The 1 p.m. BBC news today referred to the “holy” city of Mashhad where former supreme leader of Iran Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is to be buried today. Why call the city “holy”? What need was there for this? This follows King Charles’ unnecessary Roman catholic use of “holy family” and “the holy month of Ramadan”, terminology followed by Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Sarah Mullally of the Church of England follows suit with puerile servitude to Roman catholicism, and GB News also refers to “the holy father”, adding to the drip-feed indoctrination of the “holiness” of islam and Roman catholicism to the British public.

10 Jul 2026: on UK Column’s 1 p.m. News today, Patrick Henningsen reported from Mashhad, Iran, and spoke about “the holy city of Masshad” and “the holy shrine”. Is this what Jordan Peterson calls “compelled speech”, that is, to report from Iran requires such “respectful” speech, or is it voluntary? If Hennessey is a muslim, one could accept the language, but if he is not, why does UK Column use such language? Like the BBC and GBNews, this goes beyond impartial reporting and adds to the drip-feeding of public opinion.

The catalyst is the Andy Burnham’s victory in the Makerfield by-election. Burnham’s defeat of the Reform UK candidate in that by-election is viewed as Labour’s only hope of preventing Nigel Farage winning the next General Election and becoming Prime Minister. Nigel Farage interpreted it the same way.

Yet again, Nigel Farage is the king-maker. Maker-field cleared the field for Andy Burnham’s path to the British Prime Ministership.

All the incompetence of the Starmer premiership can be blotted out by this facelift. “It is not Andy Burnham’s fault” that all these disastrous policies were implemented.

If Burnham becomes Prime Minister by coronation or default, he will be the first Roman catholic UK Prime Minister. Such a religious connection is reckoned to be of little account nowadays, with an atheist Prime Minister in the UK married to a Jewess, a Hindu Prime Minister before him, a muslim Mayor of London and a muslim former First Minister in Scotland. Really? Let us see. Within 24 hours of Burnham’s succeeding to be UK Prime Minister, the news will be that he is the first Roman catholic to occupy the position. There will be much Romish joy at what is truly significant news. Softly, softly is the longterm Roman policy. The anti-globalist lobby will speak against the WEF, the UN, the WHO, and whoever, but it ignores the international influence on national politics by this global player. “Hidden in plain sight” comes to mind.

Burnham is on record as saying: “I’ve always said, and some people won’t like this, what I used to have to read in the [Roman catholic] catechism, the enfranchisement of it on Earth was the Labour Party.” Ever since being a Roman catholic altar boy, he has been guided by Roman catholicism. Who thinks that religion and politics do not mix? Andy Burnham is not the first person to give the lie to this mantra. Shirley Williams said decades ago that the social policy of Europe was based upon Roman catholic doctrine. Little wonder that Burnham is a Europhile and a multinational corporatist.

What is being labelled Manchesterism is akin to the global C4 Mayors Agenda, promoted by London Mayor Sadiq Khan but now in Burnham’s hands to implement the growing power of this new international oligarchy.

UK instability

The instability of UK governance is seen in the careering see-saw of public opinion between Jeremy Corbyn’s Momentum, then Boris Johnson’s electoral landslide, followed by Keir Starmer’s electoral landslide, followed by Reform UK’s meteoric rise under Nigel Farage, and the spin-off political parties once Nigel Farage broke the two-party dominance and hegemony of British politics.

The instability is also seen in the ease with which Burnham can map his way to 10 Downing Street, possibly by the end of next month, without being an MP, using his base as Mayor of Manchester, without being tested in public debate, without a published programme for scrutiny. Like David Cameron’s winning the leadership of the Conservative Party, this is another beauty contest with little public understanding of what is in store for the country.

I am very pleased that Starmer and Rachel Reeves are going. Neither were on top of their brief, if they even knew what it was, and the country suffered as a result.

Understandably, Nigel Farage has called for a General Election, but as Labour has its large majority in the House of Commons, a General Election will not come soon. The danger is that the public will be taken in by this facelift. It happens in politics and religion and it will continue as long as we have a politically and religiously illiterate electorate.

Links:

23 Jun 2026: Starmer fell on his sword just in time for today’s 10th anniversary of Brexit; ten years of trying to leave the grip of the European Union. The BBC could find no space on its front page for the anniversary. Instead the headline was Peter Murrell, former CEO of the Scottish National Party, Nicola Sturgeon’s former husband, has been sentenced to five years and three months in prison for embezzling more than £400,000 from SNP Party funds. Yesterday the former leader of the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) Jeffrey Donaldson was found guilty of 18 child sex abuse charges, including one charge of rape. Each area of the UK has manifested the failure of political leadership, with Labour’s loss of control in Wales at the recent May 2026 local Elections contributing to Starmer’s demise. The character of Britain’s politicians reflects the low state of Christianity in these islands.

25 Jun 2026: veteran commentator Andrew Neil supplied a catchy phrase on discussing Andy Burnham’s route to being Prime Minister, as “a coup and then be seen as not having much of a clue what to do next”. A coup with no clue!

Richard Dawkins argues his case by saying that he is looking for the truth. I grieve for him that no-one has pointed out to him his presuppositional mistakes and the error in his expectation that science will answer his questions and search for truth.

Jordan Peterson is a serious analyst but his religious turmoil is confounded by his being married to a Roman catholic. It was easy enough for Richard Dawkins to skewer him by asking if he believed in the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus.  Dawkins was interested in scientific truth and not the metaphor and myths in Peterson’s narrative. Peterson thinks that the virgin birth is “beside the issue” showing how little he understands Christianity in spite of all his study. He has been misled by his peer group.

Jacob Rees-Mogg is an intelligent man with good political and financial sense, but he is subservient to his Roman catholic priests. He invites them on to his GB News programme and it is cringeworthy to watch his sychophantic deference to them. I think that some of his other contributors must be higher-ranking Romanists, possibly in Opus Dei or Jesuitical orders, such is his deference to them, which he would explain as good manners but the perceptive will discern to be religious subservience. Roman catholicism deceives intelligent people as well as the simple masses, because Romanists likeRees-Mogg out-source their religious and theological thinking to the large number of specialist Romanists and historical figures and “doctors” of their church, like Thomas Aquinas, and now John Henry Newman, rather than study the words of Jesus and form an opinion for themselves. They are taught that the Bible is too difficult for them to exercise their right of private judgment so Rees-Mogg openly pedals Roman catholic nonsense as if it is gospel truth.

George Galloway is a passionate and religious man, respecting Roman catholicism and islam (and possibly other religions alike). I like the honesty and eloquence of this self-made man.   I agree with his passion against warfare and war-mongering.  He seems to have changed from UK Unionist to Scottish separatist. There seem to be a few situational practicalities at work in his change of thinking. At least, there is hope that he can change from Roman-islamism to true Christianity, if only he could escape his current peer group and would study Jesus’ own words. He is widely-read and has a huge worldly-wise experience, so hopefully reading his New Testament will lead him to the only Saviour, Jesus Christ, Whose man is not the imposter in the Vatican.

Neil Oliver is another Scotsman like George Galloway, who has an interest in common sense. He has rejected the public narratives about public life, not because of religion but from observation. He is not religious but he quotes the new American Roman catholic pope in Rome with approval because Leo XIV promotes the sovereignty of human life in our era of artificial intelligence. Hopefully he will come to question why people should think that the Roman catholic pope has any better answers than the general consensus of modern man. Oliver mistakes the essence of Christianity and is easily misled by the legends. He recognizes the lack of authenticity in the powerful movers and shakers of international movements. Oliver is a secular humanist with common sense, another form of the protean types of religion. He thinks authenticity and “the meaning of life” can be found in the fresh air, “in the wild wood” where one can “refresh, recalibrate and reboot your soul” – whatever that means. It sounds like yet another religious mantra, without any basis.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is a skilful and intelligent operator. One would almost think he is a crypto-Christian for I have heard him speak about Jesus as Christ, but this speech is likely to arise from the politician in him, just like Donald Trump, keeping the Christian Dispensationalist vote onside. However, the day will come when Jews nationally will acknowledge Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, and the sooner Netanyahu sees this the better.

No European politician has impressed me, but how can it be otherwise? I don’t speak their languages, a primary reason why the European Union project is undemocratic. I only hear what the media chooses to make available. However, this blogpost is about personal forms of religion rather than politics, which can be a religion, although politicians are those who are most well-known internationally and have their own form of religion. Continental religion is too subservient to the Roman catholic pope in Rome who has deceived European politicians with his over-weaning sense of self-importance. False religion continues to dominate much of European politics, with Roman catholicism, islam and secular humanism fighting it out among themselves for international dominance of the European Continent as well as the globe itself.

US President Donald Trump is a nominal Christian misled by charismatic advisers, influenced by Dispensational exegesis, but unable to distinguish true Christianity from Roman catholicism. His vice-president J. D. Vance is, like his boss, an intelligent and interesting man, but when trying to establish how to support traditional Christianity he opted for ‘historic’ Roman catholicism, only to find out that it does not quite fit his brand.

“Brand” introduces the concept of choice. In this consumer age people test which religion “suits” them, like a set of clothes. They need to learn that God does not suit this attitude – “I am that I am”, He says, not what you want Him to be. Yet people continue to look for a religion and a god that suits them.

All of these people have still to learn that they will have eternity to regret their failure to listen to Jesus Christ Who said that He is the Way, the Truth and the Life Jn 14:6. Pontius Pilate famously asked Jesus, What is truth? and failed to wait for the answer. Billions do likewise.

Religious Analysis – salvation by law-keeping

How many religions are there? When I discovered the Gospel, I learned a simple form of religious analysis at that time. Jesus Christ and His biblical religion taught salvation was by God’s grace Eph 2:8-10, Rom 3:21-26, whereas every other religion on Earth taught variations of salvation by personal merit, by “good works” or law-keeping. This distinction still holds.

Dead or Alive?

Decades later I heard another simple distinction, that the leaders of all other religions were dead, whereas Jesus Christ is alive, and alive for evermore.

Jesus says: “I am He Who lives and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen, and I have the keys of hell and of death.”

Revelation 1:18.

Jesus Christ is well worth knowing, and He warns about false religion: “The thief comes only to steal, to kill, and to destroy: I came that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” Jn 10:10.

Come and welcome to Jesus Christ.

Links:

23 Jun 2026: Neil Oliver is becoming more philosophical about belief and trust. He has come to see that there are “two groups of homo sapiens” and “by their fruits shall ye know them”. He will no longer trust people he does not know. This shows that he has still to learn the scope of trust.

I put a comment under his video – I put “Belief and trust are the ABC of Christianity – https://biblehub.com/acts/16-31.htm Little wonder that they are now at a premium.” It was removed within ten minutes.

It seems that “YouTube uses automated filters to block spam, scams, and malicious links, which means even harmless URLs can sometimes trigger these automatic deletions.” So I posted again without the link.

25 Jun 2026: a huge betrayal of trust by investment firms.

6 Jul 2027: Jesus Christ put it succinctly: “Leave them alone: they are blind leaders of the blind, and if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” Mat 15:14. There is no obligation upon Christians to help those who abuse them Mat 7:6.

They cannot face up to their own past. There are billions of such people. As the years pass, they become uncomfortable with what they have done in the past, and they use various techniques to forget it, cover it up and hope others will not discover it.

Some are more successful than others. However, conscience, when it is reminded, continues to disturb them.

They have good reason to worry, but no good reason to forget and cover up. Why not? Because it will all be revealed in due course. Ignoring it or running away from it is not the way to deal with it.

We need something better. Rich people employ lawyers and expensive public-relations teams to sanitize their image in order to make themselves acceptable in the eyes of the public or at least among their own acquaintances. This massive effort is testimony to the viciousness in the hearts of men who will remember everyone else’s faults while bypassing their own. It is a foretaste of hell where the wicked will continue to trouble each other throughout eternity.

We need to deal with this while we can. We need peace of mind which only God can give us. “Behold, now is the time to be accepted; behold, now is the day of salvation” 2Cor 6:2.

“Seek the Lord while He may be found. Call upon Him while He is near. Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy upon him, and to our God for He will abundantly pardon.”

Isa 55:6-7.

What more can the wicked ask for? “If God is for us, who can be against us?” Rom 8:31. What does it matter what others think if God is on our side?

Yet “God requires that which is past” Ecc 3:15 and God will judge those who flee from justice Ecc 3:17. As Jesus says: “they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment” Mat 12:36.

How are you going to solve this? Peace of conscience comes only from the forgiveness of God. Those who are constantly on the run from themselves can find peace with God “through our Lord Jesus Christ” Rom 5:1. This is what you need, and it is freely available to all who hear about it.

Jesus says: “Come unto Me, all you who labour and are burdened, and I will give you rest” Mat 11:28.

Come and welcome to Jesus Christ.

1. It is not a biblical phrase.
2. What is meant by ‘believer’? Usually this expression means a person who is “born again”.  So say those who believe in believer’s baptism. Really? What about someone who is not born again?  Can they not be baptized?  Not usually, according to those who support believer’s baptism.
3. What about a person who believes that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, but does not have the assurance that they are born again?  This is the same issue.  Those who support believer’s baptism will not baptize these people even if they are actually born again, because they cannot say so.
4. In other words, the belief in “believer’s baptism” is not faith in Christ but belief in one’s own salvation.  This is assurance of salvation, not the confession of Christ nor of Christianity that is required for Christian baptism.
5. In practice, the belief is not belief in Jesus Christ but believe in one’s own salvation.

So, where does this idea come from? There are various texts of Scripture used to support the idea.  None of them do so.

If Scripture is wrongly interpreted, then the whole force of biblical authority is supporting error.

The Ethiopian eunuch confessed that Jesus Christ is the Son of God Act 8:37 in order to be baptized.  His confession was not about himself nor his assurance of salvation, but about Jesus Christ.  Upon this confession, Philip baptized the Ethiopian eunuch. 

It is time to recover the proper concept of biblical baptism.

If we pass an Assisted Dying Bill we are legislating atheism because such a Bill operates on the assumption that there is no life (or pain) after death. This is atheism.

Abortion operates on the assumption that those involved in this despicable act will not be held to account, but Assisted Dying goes further than this.

Between secular atheism and aggressive islam, Britain is in a precarious position.

Islamists have introduced religion to British politics and it is time that Christians voted for a Christian Voice in Parliament.

Some muslims are agitating for an alternative World Order through islam. This UK speaker this video: “Now is the time to put the final nail in the coffin to Western liberalism” and to replace it with an islamic world order.

Worldview

Globalists advocate a multipolar world but it is a fantasy. There are competing worldviews – Christianity, international socialism or islam – which will prevail? for they do not easily co-exist.

Secularism has failed to hold back islamisation and atheism is simply one element of secularism.

If Britain legislates that there is no God, we need not be surprised if God allows all hell to break loose on Earth. Some areas of Britain appear to be experiencing this pathway already.

“Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of His saints.”

The death of God’s earthly saints is precious in His sight because they have become heavenly saints and reached their heavenly goal, leaving their earthly troubles behind them. “After death the wicked cease from troubling the godly, and there the weary are at rest” Job 3:17.

Heaven is a prepared place for a prepared people – prepared by Jesus Christ Himself. Jesus told His disciples: “I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto Myself; that where I am, there you may be also” Jn 14:2-3. Jesus comes for His own at their death.

Jesus told His disciples while they were on Earth: “Peace I leave with you. My peace I give unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid” Jn 14:27. He continued: “These things I have spoken unto you, that in Me you might have peace. In the world you shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer – I have overcome the world” Jn 16:33. In heaven, the glorified saints have also overcome the world by leaving it behind.

These saints have beaten us to the finishing line, having raced through it to join the great cloud of witnesses Heb 12:1 of our continuing earthly race. Let us follow them who, through faith and patience, are now inheriting the promises Heb 6:12.

We may have learned only a little about their earthly witness, but when I lay down my own head on Jesus’ pillow in due course, I look forward to making their acquaintance in heaven, to hear the rest of their earthly witness for Christ.

It is a joy to finish one’s earthly course and to enter into the joy of the Lord. Mat 25:21,23.

Earthly considerations

What about those grieving family and friends whom they leave behind?

The apostle Paul says that they do not need to sorrow as others who have no hope of eternal life nor happiness for their departed loved ones 1Th 4:13.

Let us learn to follow their pathway. London-preacher Charles Haddon Spurgeon wanted “devout men” to carry him down to the grave like Stephen Act 8:2 and it will be good to have a similar burial.

Let us not leave Question marks about our own eternal state

There are some whose lives are such that we have no certainty of their eternal blessedness. They leave a large question mark hanging in the air. How much better to “make your heavenly calling and eternal election sure”? 2Pe 1:10. Not only will this be to your personal, present comfort but it will comfort your family and friends when you leave this earthly scene.

How can you ensure this? It is becoming more difficult to find out. I made a recent blogpost referring to changes in Highland funeral services nowadays, substituting celebrations of the departed person’s life for the Gospel. Although there may be a place for celebration, the purpose of a Christian funeral service is to seek God’s blessing on the bereaved, just as the purpose of a Christian marriage service is to seek God’s blessing on the marriage. That former blogpost pointed out the inadequacies of some current funeral services; hopefully, this blogpost may go some way to pointing you to the Lord Jesus Christ and the blessed hope of the godly.

There is a biblical warrant for remembering the godly Heb 13:7 and even the ungodly “Remember Lot’s wife” Lk 17:32. We may celebrate the life of the godly and we may celebrate the death of wicked oppressors, dictators and tyrants.

However, a Christian funeral service is the very time to learn how to find peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ Rom 5:1. “It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting, which is the finish of all men; and the living will lay it to his heart” Ecc 7:2.

Jesus speaks to the heart and mind. He touches them and changes them forever.  If you do not know about this potential in the Gospel, now is the time to learn about it.

A lingering or sudden death?

The Lord knows the best way for us to leave this earthly scene. A lingering death is the Lord’s kind providence giving time to prepare for the inevitable. A sudden and unexpected death is also the Lord’s providence, as in the case of Job’s children. A long battle with terminal illness reminds us of our long battle with sin, the flesh and devil and the sudden release when the soul takes it departure from the body reminds us that the godly will be rid of them all in an instant of time – thanks be to God.

Thereafter the soul returns to God Who gave it Ecc 12:7 and man enters his eternal or “long home” Ecc 12:5.

I finish off this blogpost with Christian affection for and condolences to wounded spirits.

I grieve with you mourning your loss and point you to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Resurrection and the Life, Whom to know is eternal life Jn 17:3. I hope that you will find and feel the Lord’s rich consolations at so difficult a time.

Links:

14 Jan 2025: the finishing line.

I have attended countless funerals in my lifetime, and last winter has taken its toll upon a significant number of people that I knew. Witnessing these funerals I draw attention to the subtle changes that are taking place.

Instead of seeking God’s blessing upon the bereaved family, mourning friends and acquaintances, the tone is changing towards celebrating the deceased person’s life by way of thanking God for them, and supporting the family in their bereavement.  This is well and good in its own place, but it is substituting for seeking God’s blessing upon all concerned.

Scripture guides us how to comfort the bereaved when the godly die 1Th 4:13-18 and how to direct the mourners to the only true Comforter through Jesus Christ.

Instead of this, Christian comfort is being misapplied and sometimes it is even missing.

The Gospel is not often overtly declared, and sometimes it is absent, the preacher leaving the life of the deceased to do the talking for him by way of a potted biography extolling the deceased.

The warning about preparation for meeting God in eternity is rarely heard, and more importantly, how to find peace with God is not explicitly explained.

Instead I have heard Rest In Peace (RIP) declared, the Roman Catholic prayer for souls in purgatory, whom they think are not yet at peace, so they pray even for their deceased popes to have peace. There is plenty scope for preachers to correct these misleading doctrines and to point their hearers in the right direction, towards Jesus Christ as a welcoming Saviour while there is yet time to find “peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ” Rom 5:1.

The past

In the past, a Highland funeral service usually followed soon after death, at which God’s blessing and comfort was sought for the bereaved. Attendees showed their respect for the deceased by their attendance at their burial.  If the person was publicly significant, such as happens with Prime Minsters and Presidents, there might be a memorial service arranged at a later date. Similar distinctions are made on other occasions, such as the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II, over a year after her accession to the throne of the United Kingdom.

Nowadays, the latter memorial service is being conflated and even replacing the former funeral service, beginning to conform to the varied practices throughout world history, but departing from biblical worship.

Current competition

As funeral directors compete with each other for business, there are more funeral businesses and national firms appearing in the Highlands of Scotland.  Their services to the bereaved are more ornate than the simple Presbyterian or Puritan “send-off” that has hitherto been witnessed in the Highlands. Additionally, humanist celebrants are avoiding the religious element altogether. An Inverness funeral director promoted the building of a Crematorium in Inverness, against which I campaigned at the time.  Now evangelical Christians are burning their dead, a significant change, whereas Abraham, the father of the faithful, buried his dead Gen 23:4,8.  Jesus on His cross cried, “Father, into Thy hands I commit My spirit.” It is as well for us that His body was not burned but solemnly buried – “Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and He was buried, and He rose again the third day according to the scriptures” 1Cor 15:4-5.

From a Christian point of view, which is worse? – a humanist funeral with a burial or a christian funeral with a cremation?  One needs to ask also, what is one trying to achieve by each of these? In one, the humanist denies the being of God. In the other, the Christian burns what they believe was once the image of God in man. Humanists celebrate the life of the deceased but don’t thank God for it.  Christians seek God’s blessing on the bereaved through the worship of God, then the body made in the image of God is burned.  This is so inconsistent that you may understand why I cannot be a part of the latter hypocrisy. The former is consistent but the latter is God-defying, possibly out of ignorance. The best biblical text for demonstrating God’s displeasure with cremation is Amos 2:1.  Sometimes in Scripture we read of large numbers of decomposing carcasses being burned, probably for hygienic or practical reasons after a battle, but the singular burning of the bones of the ungodly king of Edom was abominated by God.  How much more the bodily remains of the godly?  It is an unchristian ritual, and will God bless it?

Controversial History

I gave an analysis of the principles behind funerals and burial at a Free Presbyterian Theological Conference more than twenty years ago, but the most significant person was not there to hear it, far less to “confer” upon the subject. Instead lessons were not learned and the Free Presbyterian Church had a few years of disagreement over “the funeral overture” from the Southern Presbytery and manifest inconsistences in subsequent practice.

The Synod debates on the subject were so poor that they even descended into prescribing the number of psalms to be sung at worship, the first liturgy introduced into and mandated for Free Presbyterian worship in its long history. Of course, it did not hold and there was one rule for one and another rule for another.

One significant observor told me some years later that he thinks the counting of votes was wrong and according to his calculation the vote should have gone “the other way” in favour of what I was saying.

This was a failure of the spirit of Presbyterianism. Instead of conference there was imposition. I have noted many conferences that do not confer, such as the Scottish Reformed Conference which I stopped attending many years ago because it consisted simply of three sermons without any conferring. It may be my regular criticism of this point which makes the Free Presbyterian annual conference a true conference with about an hour or more of conferring. On the other hand, some lecturers run over their time with lengthy papers, such as the annual Free Church School in Theology, so that there is little or no time to confer, nor to discover that the speaker cannot answer the questions raised.

The spirit of Presbyterianism

It is the nature of Presbyterianism to confer and make use of the wisdom of “a multitude of counsellors” but too often this is abandoned in favour of “following my leader”. The ability to use biblical exegesis to solve disputes, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, has given way to following authority figures and their opinions. This is far from the apostle Paul’s example:

“But we have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the Word of God deceitfully, but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”

2Corinthians 4:2

Worse than “follow my leader” is the current policy of “catch me if you can” in which church leaders simply do as they please, like teenagers testing their boundaries, to see what they can get away with.  This is becoming commoner with the worship of God, which is changing from God-centred worship to man-centred entertainment.  This spirit is developing at Highland funeral services, promoted by the next factor changing funeral practices in the Highlands.

Funeral directors

There are other factors at play in the Scottish Highlands, such as competition between the funeral directors. The established businesses are being squeezed by newcomers who are catering to the aesthetics of the trade, trying to make glamorous what is a solemn occasion and transaction, lightening the mood of the occasion.

The coffin is solemnly introduced to the celebratory occasion, with ritualistic bowing, processions and other novelties, so that the body is not “left out in the cold” – a genuine comment to me, and not a humorous pun.

If it was not the worship of God, some of this might be acceptable. So possibly one needs to conclude that some of these public meetings are simply not the worship of God. They are family gatherings to which friends are invited, and some religious elements are included. Humanist funerals are becoming commoner and their lighter, celebratory, musical elements entertaining the attendees may influence some Christians to imitate them, but just as church hymnody cannot match secular entertainment, one should not think that man-centred ‘worship’ can outmatch humanist celebrations. The Christian church should abide by God-centred worship at funeral services and make it meaningful and relevant.

The Christian witness

At Christian funeral services, many preachers are failing to use the opportunity to warn people about a lost eternity and to invite them to Jesus Christ with the free offer of the Gospel. Frequently the mourners are none the wiser that there is “a heaven to be won and a hell to shun”. Although the life of the deceased may be used to suggest that others should follow in their steps, yet preachers need to explain how this is done. While seeking to comfort the mourners that the deceased has gone to heaven, there is rarely any explanation how we can follow them to heaven. I was recently told after a funeral service that this “was not the time to discuss this”.  Really? If so, things are definitely changing in the Scottish Highlands.

Links:

18 May 2026: Christian condolences.