About author & site

ABOUT AUTHOR & SITE

OVERVIEW: I wrote this site, in my spare time, over the last 43 years (1981–2024). I paused for 4 years (1998– 2002) because my children were young & needed me. Also because I was doing an office job, looking at a computer screen all day. All other jobs were menial (photo: me, at work, 2022). So my mind was clear to think & make brief notes while at work, yet fresh to think & write after work.

.

IN DETAIL: 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 I went to a local church, in 1975, for social reasons, not spiritual. But I became a Christian, early in 1976, aged 21, when a family problem forced me to pray and God answered. That that first prayer, and subsequent prayers, were answered at all showed me that Christianity worked. However, for the first five years of being a Christian, I increasingly wanted to know how Christianity worked: not only out of curiosity, but also to help me communicate Christianity to others (especially to those who insist on logic, i.e. men).

So, in 1981, five years after becoming a Christian, I started thinking and writing. First of all I wrote & printed some logical, objective, leaflets, (instead of the usual, emotive, subjective, ones) and handed them out on the street. I also saw that many in the secular world were also thinking: “Scientists are right. Yet they can’t be right: we must be more than just intelligent animals.” Hence: YouTube: – Supertramp’s The Logical Song [1979] and later: YouTube: – Lily Allen’s The Fear [2008].

I continued to think & to write such that, three years later, in 1984, the leaflets had become a book manuscript. I sent it to three publishers, but they all rejected it. But that was OK with me, because, while waiting for their replies, I’d generated more, important, material. Little did I know that this was to continue, decade after decade. I’d be building a structure of concepts, like joining the dots: more discovery than invention. Jumping ahead fourteen years, to 1998: The internet & computers had arrived and I did two computer courses in order to get an office job. I was then able to convert my manuscript into this website. I then continued working on it for another two and a half decades, until now, 2024.

.

Going back to just before I started thinking & writing: regarding the evangelistic reason for writing this site, I came to reckon that: We have no grid for the gospel to land on. Or rather, we have a grid onto which the gospel cannot land. 1) Pseudo science: Surely, the big bang, the age of universe, and Darwin’s theory of evolution, all prove that God does not exist. 2) Incomplete thinking: All wars are caused by religion. Christianity is a religion. So Christianity is bad. 3) Incomplete thinking: For something that existed before the universe the triune God of Christianity is too complex. Indeed, the whole Bible narrative is so complex that it’s as improbable as Greek mythology.

Hence, in this site, I re-present Christianity: So that it can land on our grid, can be understood objectively. Then an unbeliever might say: “Well, I still don’t want to become a Christian but at least I understand it now.” Or: “Now that I understand, I’m in.” The apostle Paul did miracles: a) to meet people’s medical needs, and: b) to help people believe: Acts c13 v11 Acts c14 v10 Acts c16v18 Acts c19 v11-12 Acts c20 v10-12 Acts c28 v5 Acts c28 v8. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Just like Jesus said would happen. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Mark c2 v1-12 John c4 v48 But Paul also sometimes used logic: b) to help people believe. Acts c17 – c18.

.

Going back to just before I started thinking & writing: I asked God for the tools I’d need to write this manuscript/site (experiences, abilities, books, etc). God replied, over a number of days, that he’d already given most of them to me. And any he’d not yet given, he soon would. Hence, in 1981, I started thinking & writing.

.

One unusual piece of guidance, from God, was as follows: Five years into writing, in 1986, I was washing up, as a temp, in a kitchen. The catering contractor was about to change and I was agency staff with the outgoing contractor. So I knew that, if I asked the new contractor to take me on as permanent staff, they’d say “Yes”, because I’m already established and they wouldn’t have to pay an introduction fee. Hence, a day or so later, as I was walking into an 18-30s after-church meeting, at a house I’d never been to before, I asked God which, of the following, he wanted me to do: 1) Ask the new contractor to take me on as permanent staff. 2) Pursue a career in art & design. (I’d got a diploma at A&D college and privately hoped God would lead me that way.) 3) Some other answer, of God’s choosing. I looked around the entrance hall, for a Bible, that I could randomly, but faithfully, open for God to speak to me. But there was only a Thompson’s phone directory. (N.B. There is much more to hearing from God than only random print, only hearing a voice, only having a dream/trance/vision, etc: It could be a mistake. It could be madness. It could be God. It could be a demon.) ,, ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see third cell of: WHAT TO PRAY FOR.,,,,, I picked up the Thompson’s directory envisaging seeing an advert, in the yellow pages, of a printers or suchlike, confirming my hopes of art & design. But as I picked it up, I could see, from the edge, that there were no yellow pages; only white name-&-address-&-phone-number pages. I promptly opened it, randomly, and the page I’d opened it was, indeed the first thing my eyes landed on was, the name & address of the place I was currently working at! Stunned, I continued staring at it for a while, then closed the directory & put it down. I didn’t tell the others, I thought it would be beyond them. After the meeting I prayed: “Lord, I’m certain this is either Satan (or more probably an underling demon) or it’s you. But I don’t think it’s demonic because it’s not much of a temptation: I don’t want to do it. It’s not impractical or wrong. Just honest, boring, work. So, I reckon it’s you. So I will do it. And, if it’s a mistake, I’ll leave it to you to redirect me.”

After several years the workload became impossible. So, with apprehension, I left, but nothing untoward happened. Then, as I got successive washing up jobs, I realised God’s message in the phone directory: God wanted me to do simple, menial, work generally: So that I could think & make brief notes at work and, after work, still have a clear head for even more thinking & writing at home. I.E. He wanted me to produce this site and knew it would take decades to do it. I only gradually realised the full meaning of this, as each year, then each decade, rolled by. If I’d known at the beginning, or even after a decade or so, that it would take 43 years to produce this website then I’d have been seriously tempted to quit or cut corners.

In 1998, after twelve years of washing up, bad knees forced me to change job, from stand-up-menial to sit-down-office work. But even that turned out to be centred around this site: The office job (four years working with software writers & computer hardware engineers), plus the two computer courses I needed to do to get the job, prompted me, and enabled me, to turn my manuscript into this website. Mind you, the office work itself was on a computer. So, after work each day, I was too screened out to work on my manuscript/site. Also my two children, young at that time, needed my attention. Hence, for those four years, the manuscript/site was on hold.

.

Going back to just before I started thinking & writing: I noticed that, historically, famous scientific inventions & discoveries had often been made using minimum data but maximum thinking. So, I reckoned that, in this information-rich age: the data I needed was probably commonplace and the main thing I needed to do was think a lot. It seems I reckoned correctly.

.

Incidentally, God guides us all in very different ways. So be open minded about how he will guide you. Also, be open minded about where he will guide you to go and what he will guide you to do. In the Bible, in Acts: God told Peter, a Jewish fisherman, to be the apostle to the Jews. Yet told Paul, an ex-Pharisee, fully conversant with Jewish laws, to be the apostle to the gentiles (gentiles are non-Jews). This seems to be the wrong way round: 1) Bill Johnson concludes, I’m sure rightly, that God did this so that the credit for the success of their ministries would not go to Peter & Paul, but to God. 2) Andrew Wommack identifies with the parable of the soils. Matt c13 v3-8 & v19-23 Mark c4 v3-8 & v14-20 Luke c8 v4-15 In the parable, the successful soil was the soil that lacks, had nothing added to it, was only soil. Likewise Andrew is happy to admit that he has few natural abilities, is only soil.

Combining 1) and 2), I reckon that God did what he did, with Peter & Paul, because it can work better, quicker. If your ministry is territory you’re familiar with so that you have opinions & thoughts of your own, then you’ll need to continuously make an effort to give God’s spoken words priority. But if God puts you in a ministry that you are totally unfamiliar with, then you’ll be all ears so you will get things right every time.

Though, as I say, it can work better, quicker: There are ministries, natural rather than miraculous, where the opposite applies.

.

NATURE OF SITE

This site is philosophical Christianity: Philosophy is: Thinking inside and outside of every box to get the big picture: an unknown adventure. Philosophical Christianity is: As above, except you have some idea of the big picture, of where you’re going. ,, ,, ,, ,, C. S. Lewis’ book Mere Christianity is the only other example ,, ,, ,, ,, of philosophical Christianity that I can think of. ,, ,, ,, ,, N.B. I am only a self-taught philosophical Christian. ,, ,, ,, ,, I have no theological training.

This site is not Christian philosophy: Christian philosophy is: Principles for Christian living. Reasons, usually biblical, for Christian lifestyle. ,, ,, ,, ,, For example: Andrew Wommack’s teaching: ,, ,, ,, ,, Andrew Wommack Ministries: Christian Philosophy. . . .

,, ,, N.B. Whether a Christian produces: ,, ,, ,, ,, philosophical Christianity ,, ,, ,, ,, or ,, ,, ,, ,, Christian philosophy, ,, ,, they’d prefer to be called: ,, ,, ,, ,, a philosophical Christian ,, ,, ,, ,, not a ,, ,, ,, ,, Christian philosopher. ,, ,, ,, ,, Philosophical – adjective (least important). ,, ,, ,, ,, Christian – noun (most important).

.

93.11% of this site is entirely my own material (more about percentages shortly). My work tends to be rather technical: Like explaining how a scene is beautiful: conceptually dissecting & analyzing it. Or like explaining how a certain joke made you laugh: studying every psychological & physical mechanism. Explanations of beautiful scenes and funny jokes are not what God, or the comedian, designed them for, intended them for. They were intended to match our design. Hence most people may well not benefit from a technical explanation, may not like my philosophical, technical, material.

If that’s you, if you don’t want technical explanations: Then perhaps read the practical webpage: A better site than this one, and the links within it. (This link does not open a new tab.) But, if you think you would benefit from my technical explanations: Then read the site proper (dark text on pastel pages). See long column of links on left of Home page.

.

This site is called ‘How Christianity Works’. So the principles in it aren’t necessarily ones you apply. They are principles God’s Spirit applies. It usually takes too long, and is unnecessary, for you to compute a situation so as to know what to do. It’s quicker, simpler, and more reliable, to listen to, and to obey, God’s Spirit. Just believe, and renew your mind accordingly. ,, ,, Perhaps see first cell of: ,, ,, WHAT IS A BELIEVER? WHAT IS THE GOSPEL?. , , , ,

.

Some parts of this site are mere common knowledge. But they are there because: o I’ve tried to make this site as comprehensive as I can. And sometimes that means including what’s commonly known. o Sometimes a piece of mere common knowledge is a step in a long train of thought.

.

This site is a product of my own thinking. Or rather: the 93.11% of it, that I produced, is a product of my own thinking. This site is not some long prophesy from God, some dictation from God. 1 Cor c12 v8. . . . . (Can’t imagine why anyone would think that, but just in case.)

.

God does indeed give, to Christians: prophesies, words of knowledge, words of wisdom. But, logically, they are always about relatively practical matters: life stuff, not big picture stuff. For example, God may tell you: o about someone’s problem (a word of knowledge) o and what he, God, says to do to fix it (prophesy) o perhaps adding some instructions, for you, as to how you are to handle the word of knowledge (a word of wisdom). For the difference between prophesy & words of knowledge see: YouTube: – Prophetic Word vs. Word of Knowledge ,, // Katia Adams // Vineyard Insights.,,,,,

God’s only direct contributions to this site were: o To tell me why Jesus fasted for a whole forty days & nights: God had asked me: “Why did Jesus need to fast for a full 40 days?” I couldn’t think of the answer. Then God said to me: “Because, as well as being fully God, he was also fully human.” I use this in: fourth cell (starting God’s Spirit went into Jesus) , , of: GOD THE SON and in: first cell of: THE NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXT OF FASTING.,, o To tell me (nagged me – I wasn’t keen) to rename the site: How Christianity Works: I had previously called it: initially: The Nitty Gritty then: Nitty Gritty then: Logical Christianity.

.

An unbeliever will say: “God speaks to you? And you can, in Jesus’ name, do miracles? ,, ,, ‘Do’ is the verb used in the KJV. (Though see Acts c3 v12 & v16.) Who do you think you are?” because they think that someone’s got to be good enough to hear from God & do miracles. They see that no-one is good enough. But they don’t believe that Jesus’ crucifixion made all of us good enough. Believing this lets the Holy Spirit through the front door and into the hallway of your mind. Renewing your mind to be like Jesus’ mind, your thinking to be like Jesus’ thinking, lets the Holy Spirit in to every room of your mind.

.

The ability to think is not one of the gifts of the Spirit: Rom c12 v6-8 1 Cor c12 v8-10 Perhaps also see first cell of: KNOWLEDGE: SO WHAT. , Whereas, a word of knowledge is one of the gifts of the Spirit. A word of knowledge is faster, & more accurate, than thinking: Partly because God’s ability to think is better than your/my ability to think. Mainly because God’s database is vastly bigger than your/my database and includes all the future and all the past). However, if you are good at thinking, & know much, God doesn’t want you to dumb down. He just wants you to not be proud & independent, wants your heart to renew your mind, so that you can use your mind in conjunction with his loving, powerful, wise, very knowledgeable Holy Spirit within you. He wants: teamwork, conversation, company, to give and to receive, to love and to be loved, for there to be ever more relationships, constructive relationships. For God is not only the Creator, he is also the Constructor.

.

That: the ability to think is not one of the gifts of the Spirit Rom c12 v6-8 1 Cor c12 v8-10 could have made me think that God disapproved of this site. So, if it weren’t for: o God’s guidance – encouraging me, (see: One unusual piece etc earlier on this page). o Support, in the Bible, for my conclusions. then I may not have had the courage to write such webpages as: Hell does not exist yet. , ,

Perhaps also see: KNOWLEDGE: SO WHAT , , and: STUDYING AND DOING. , ,

.

THINKING TOOLS THAT I USED

INTRODUCTION The brain itself is not only an information storer (knowledge and belief). It is also an information processor (thinking). Knowledge = a structure. Belief = a structure. Thinking = a process, a change of structure.

.

DIFFERENT KINDS OF THINKING Logical thinking. I see logical thinking as simple and intuitive. But, if you insist, see: Wikipedia: Logic. Or use Google to find some other definition of logical thinking.

Lateral thinking: I learnt lateral thinking from The Use Of Lateral Thinking (1967 edition) by Edward De Bono (Maltese). (I read it in 1976.) To write this manuscript/website I used both: the accidental, natural, lateral thinking that Edward identified: ,, ,, ,, 1) For logical problems: ,, ,, ,, ,, it’s usually insufficient data that causes logjams ,, ,, ,, ,, rather than your lack of processing ability. ,, ,, ,, 2) For creative thinking: ,, ,, ,, ,, it’s usually logic alone ,, ,, ,, ,, that fails to deliver. ,, ,, ,, However, in both cases, ,, ,, ,, people have often found that they get inspiration: ,, ,, ,, ,, At odd times. ,, ,, ,, ,, When they go somewhere else. ,, ,, ,, ,, When they do some unrelated activity ,, ,, ,, ,, (hence I always carry paper & biro). and the deliberate, artificial, lateral thinking that Edward invented: ,, ,, ,, Again, for the problems in paragraphs 1) and 2), above: ,, ,, ,, ,, Turn around, and add, to the problem, the first thing you see. ,, ,, ,, ,, Or randomly take some data out. ,, ,, ,, ,, Or imagine the problem is already solved: ,, ,, ,, ,, what would it look like from the other side? ,, ,, ,, ,, Or imagine the problem from a worm’s eye view, ,, ,, ,, ,, or a Martian’s view, or etc. ,, ,, ,, Most of the new ideas will be useless ,, ,, ,, but a few will be good. ,, ,, ,, For both solving logical problems and for generating new ideas, ,, ,, ,, you need to alternate lateral thinking with logical thinking: ,, ,, ,, ,, Logic alone – and you are merely a computer. ,, ,, ,, ,, Lateral alone – and you are mindlessly playing.

William of Ockham’s (English) thinking tool (Occam’s Razor): Identify what’s not important – and cut it off. E.G. Of two possible explanations (e.g. two explanations for something’s existence: one simple, one complex,) the simple one is probably the true one.

René Descartes’ (French) thinking tool: Divide a complex problem into smaller problems to make it/them easier to solve. Not just in maths, but in any area of life.

Descartes’ thinking tool (above) inspired me to use other mathematical processes in a non-mathematical context (i.e. other than division): addition, subtraction, multiplication, sets & subsets. I call this mathematical grammar.

Descartes’ thinking tool also inspired me to:

Divide: to produce: particularly, what I call: To these: I then apply:

a complex concept simpler concepts universally usable conceptual building blocks. universally usable conceptual building blocks mathematical grammar E.G. Indivisible Factors in: Proof of God’s existence. , ,

As well as using mathematical grammar to do my workings out, I also use it to present my finished conclusion: I try to use such words as: is, is not, only, also, all, none, with, without, always, never, because, so/therefore/hence/thus, ,, ,, ,, ,, I try to use the words so/therefore/hence/thus ,, ,, ,, ,, rather than the word because ,, ,, ,, ,, so as to keep the train of logic running forwards. same, opposite, before, after, etc.

.

In 1982, after about only a year into writing this site, when it was still a book manuscript, I felt God telling me to tear it up: I had got to a state where I had a mess of ideas, couldn’t see the wood for the trees, and was frustrated with the project. So I assumed God was frustrated with it too and that that was why he was telling me to tear it up. So, reluctantly, I tore it up, destroyed it. However, I had unwittingly committed it to memory such that, during the next three months, I fretfully went over it all, in my mind. Finally, I blurted it all out, on paper. To my delight I found that, during those three months, the unimportant material had all but dropped out of my mind and the important material had ordered itself organically. ‘Organic’, here, meaning: like a spider’s web with the most important bits in the middle. God had introduced me to a method of editing & re-arranging that I call ‘editing-by-forgetting’. Though I’m glad I never had to do that again.

Going back to 1977 approx, I had already read Tony Buzan’s (English) study guide Use Your Head, published by the BBC’s Open University. The book had shown me that: The mind is structured organically, like a spider’s web, with the (more) important bits in or near the middle. Hence any material that you want to learn, or comprehend better, or both, is best laid out, like a spider’s web, on an unlined sheet of paper. You then review it the next day, then the next week, then the next month, etc. Buzan figured out that this would work because it’s the reverse of how the brain forgets things. As for me: as soon as the site was re-arranged, in my mind, and I’d then blurted it all out on sheets of paper, I knew to: arrange those sheets, cutting where necessary, like a spider’s web: with the more fundamental sections near/in the middle, and the less fundamental sections near/at the edge. I then ‘plucked up’ the middle of the web and made that the beginning of the manuscript, likewise stretching out the rest of the web so that it became linear. Perhaps also see: COMPREHENSION. , , , ,

.

I’ve always had habits that later turned out to be useful thinking tools for writing this site: 1) I’d always used my mind as: A processor and a holistic-memory storage. Never a detailed-memory storage. (Hence I always have blank paper & biro. The chalkboard of my mind only holds a few thoughts, especially if they’re abstract.) ,, ,, ,, This has always seemed efficient to me ,, ,, ,, and was confirmed when I read: ,, ,, ,, Wikipedia: Ten percent of the brain myth. , , Hence I value: Google. This website. The internal Windows search engine on my standalone PC. The KJV Bible, in MS Word, on my standalone PC. Etc. 2) I habitually continue with something even when it seems I’ve arrived: where I’ve got to might not be the end of the road. 3) I habitually keep stepping backwards: to get a better view just in case I’m missing something. (For normal problems you step forward.) 4) I habitually extrapolate: If a principle is true in a small way then it’s true in a big way. (E.G. A miracle is naturally impossible. And, as impossible is digital, as something can’t be more impossible or less impossible, as something is either impossible or it isn’t, so also a small miracle occurring means that a big miracle can occur.) 5) I habitually scrutinise problems & questions to see if, actually, they are also data or even answers. Likewise, I often backwards engineer: from a realised answer to a, yet unrealised, question.

.

I also have thinking tools that I inherited: o Intelligence. Back in 2017 I tried joining Mensa. Their test measured my IQ as 140 on the Cattell B scale (you have to be 148 to join Mensa, so I didn’t make it). ,, ,, N.B. Intelligence is not necessarily a virtue: ,, ,, Satan & his underling demons ,, ,, must have some degree of intelligence. ,, ,, But they’re wrong with it, destructive in the long run with it. o Patience: I really did need the 43 years minus 4 that it took me to write this site. o Independence of mind: Handy for being against the status quo where appropriate.

.

It’s not only: my ‘processing power’, and the thinking tools, that enabled me to write this site. It’s also: the ‘data’, my life experiences, that were vital: Books I’d read, especially the Bible. Sermons I’d heard at church but mostly on YouTube. All of Andrew Wommack’s Audio Teachings. Science, that I’d studied, at school and since. Later on this webpage I’ve got: ,, ,, NATURAL EVENTS ,, ,, THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS SITE , , , and, immediately after it: ,, ,, SUPERNATURAL EVENTS ,, ,, THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS SITE. , , , I reckon God co-ordinated all this data, all my life experiences. I feel clever, but I’m not that clever. I’m like a pawn, or a knight (bit more jumpy), in the hands of a, considerate, master chess player.

.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

93.11% of this site is my material: You can spot my material because it’s: o Logical, technical, even scientific. o Usually biblical. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see: MY ATTITUDE TO THE BIBLE. , , , 6.89% of this site is other people’s material; they are usually Christians. You can spot other Christians’ material because it’s: o Not necessarily logical or technical. o Rarely scientific. o Always biblical.

By other people’s material I mean that: 1) Their work inspired me. or: 2) I quote them, add their work to mine, though not word for word.

I credit other people for their work: I identify all instances of 1) & 2) in the next section. I also identify most instances of 1) & 2) next to the material itself. I am keen to acknowledge their work. Indeed, I often recommend their websites over mine, over this. See: A better site than this one. , , ,

I did 1) & 2) in order to make this site as complete and as comprehensive as I can: It seems I do not have a monopoly of the truth nor can I get to the truth before everybody else.

.

BREAKDOWN OF THE 6.89% THAT WAS INSPIRED BY, OR LITERALLY IS, OTHER PEOPLE’S MATERIAL

4.15% of this site: o Was inspired by Andrew Wommack. o Or it literally is Andrew Wommack’s material, though not word for word, apart from: his saying: “If you believe God can heal you go to God. If you believe the doctor can heal you go to the doctor.” that I put in: SIN CONSCIOUSNESS ,,,, and his saying: “God loves us, not because we are lovely, but because he is loving.” that I put in: THE LOVE OF GOD ,,,, I’ve coloured, in brown: o All of Andrew’s material. Plus copies. o My material that was inspired by Andrew’s material. Plus copies. o Bible scriptures that Andrew drew my attention to that I would not otherwise have thought important. Plus copies. ,, ,, The 4.15% figure (top of this cell) ,, ,, does not include Bible scriptures.

Mark Hemans’ teaching and Dan Mohler’s teaching (and many others’ teachings, perhaps see next webpage: A better site than this one) overlap with Andrew Wommack’s teaching: they’ve discovered / realised / been told by God / etc the same things as Andrew discovered / etc. However: 1) I discovered Andrew early on. 2) Andrew’s teachings are more objective than the others’ teachings. So, in writing this, rather technical, site, Andrew’s teachings dovetail with my writing better than the others’ teachings. Hence, I have: a brown colour for Andrew’s teaching, but no colour for Mark’s or Dan’s or others’ teachings. Bear this in mind when reading brown text. See comparison cell, starting: Dan’s style is,,,,,, in: ABOUT BIBLICAL TEACHER-HEALERS GENERALLY. See comparison cell, starting: I reckon that the differences between ,, ,, Andrew Wommack and Mark Hemans are, in: INTRODUCTION. See text, starting: Indeed, one distinct thing about Pentecostal practices,,,,, to bottom of cell, in: ABOUT BIBLICAL TEACHER-HEALERS GENERALLY.

1.54% of this site: Why the four gospels (four books in the Bible) ,, ,, are so Old Testament, , , , , was inspired by chapter four of Pastor Chris Oyakhilome’s book: Praying the right way. In it, he writes that the New Testament actually starts at John c19 v30, not at Matt c1 v1. , , , , , Though I add the clarification that: Jesus was the first to preach Forgiveness, Forgiveness first appears in the gospels. Hence the gospels are New Testament. But the gospels lack Pentecost. Hence the gospels are Old Covenant. Perhaps see: JESUS PREACHED ,, ,, BOTH JUDGMENT AND FORGIVENESS , , , , , and its subsections and part 4) of: GOD DOES NOT CHANGE ,, ,, BUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH US CHANGES. , , , , ,

0.66% of this site: SO, BE CAREFUL NOT TO ENTER INTO ,, ,, THE OLD COVENANT, , , , , , and the section after it, YOU’VE PROBABLY ALREADY FAILED ANYWAY, , , , , , were, at least partly, inspired by Russel Earl Kelly PhD speaking in a TV debate on tithing: YouTube: – Should The Church Teach Tithing?,,, I also quote a line of Russel’s speech (though not word for word).

0.51% of this site, the first two cells of: DEMON POSSESSION, , , , were inspired by Mark Hemans in one of his sermons (though not word for word).

0.03% of this site: GREAT FAITH,,,,, was inspired by Pastor Joseph Prince speaking on one of his TV programmes about a conversation he once had with God (though not word for word).

.

I already realised the truth of the following two paragraphs: It usually takes too long, and is unnecessary, for you to compute a situation to know what to do. It’s quicker, simpler, and more reliable, to listen to, and to obey, God’s Spirit. Just believe, and renew your mind accordingly. However, I had not, originally, put this concept into this website. I then noticed that Mark Hemans uses this concept so much, & so well, that I decided to make six more copies of the above two paragraphs in whole site (four of six in site proper (the pastel pages), totals 0.20% of site proper.) So I want to give Mark the credit for drawing my attention back to it. Perhaps see seventh cell (starting: Mark Hemans, Australian) of: ABOUT BIBLICAL TEACHER-HEALERS GENERALLY.

.

The above percentages apply to: ,, ,, The site proper ,, ,, (i.e. dark text on pastel pages). ,, ,, ,, ,, See long column of links ,, ,, ,, ,, on left of Home page. ,, ,, Not to white text on dark colour pages ,, ,, (like this one). I worked out the percentages, in MS Word, ,, ,, using Edit then Replace ,, ,, to count letters: ,, ,, ‘not bold’ – so as to not count titles ,, ,, ‘not italic’ – so as to not count Bible scriptures ,, ,, (well, most of each Bible scripture, ,, ,, perhaps see: CHANGES I MAKE TO KJV BIBLE SCRIPTURES) ,, ,, ‘Times New Roman’ – so as to not count: ,, ,, ,, ,, hyperlinks, ,, ,, ,, ,, and Arial-small-font notes. ,, ,, ‘colour brown 100 50 0’ – so as to count: ,, ,, ,, ,, Andrew Wommack’s material ,, ,, ,, ,, and copies, ,, ,, ,, ,, and my material inspired by Andrew Wommack’s material ,, ,, ,, ,, and copies. ,, ,, I then rounded the percentages up/down to two decimal places.

,, ,, Diagrams in this site are JPEG files. ,, ,, Hence the text in them (there’s very little) ,, ,, is not digitally findable. ,, ,, So, to make half-remembered diagrams findable: ,, ,, ,, ,, I duplicated each diagram’s text ,, ,, ,, ,, in white 1pt Times New Roman (white – so that it’s invisible) ,, ,, ,, ,, next to the diagram.

.

The first cell of: WHAT TO PRAY FOR, , , , was inspired by Nasir Siddiki speaking on one of his TV programmes. It is a negligible fraction of a percent of this site.

The second cell of: NOT SIN ,, ,, BUT PROPENSITY TO SIN, , , , partly consists of information from: Revival Today (site no longer exists) and: Wikipedia: Hamartia, (though not word for word). It is a negligible fraction of a percent of this site.

The two paragraphs: starting 1) Demons outlive humans, , , of: HOW DEMONS ARE ABLE TO DO THINGS and its copy, the two paragraphs: starting b) Demons outlive humans, , , of SO, – WHERE DO TODAY’S BAD THINGS COME FROM? were told to me by the vicar of my previous church (though not word for word). They are a negligible fraction of a percent of this site.

A few lines, of the sections: GOD THE SON, , , , and: THE NEW TESTAMENT CONTEXT OF FASTING, , , , stating that Jesus feasted, not fasted, just prior to Gethsemane, are from a webpage of Bible.org (though not word for word). They are a negligible fraction of a percent of this site.

The fifth line of the section: NOT ONLY WORDS, , , , is from: YouTube: – Kingdom Awakening SOS, ,, ,, Brook Potter’s Q&A Times , , , (though not word for word). It is a negligible fraction of a percent of this site.

The line, starting 1) Jesus is answering, of later webpage End Times (about Jesus answering two questions at once) was told to me by a friend at church. It is a negligible fraction of a percent of this site.

In item 2), (starting: 2) Jesus’ spirit(ghost)), of eighth cell of: GOD THE SON: I did not write ‘Jesus went to Hell’ because of the article: Did Jesus go to hell ,, ,, between His death and resurrection? Likewise, the line starting: Then he went to Sheol, of fourth cell of: WHAT IS A BELIEVER? WHAT IS THE GOSPEL?.

In line starting: Sudden relief,, , , in third cell of: GOD’S METHODS, I write: ‘Sudden relief is how a comedy punch-line works’. It is a negligible fraction of a percent of this site. It was inspired by the late Sir Ken Dodd OBE who, speaking live on BBC Radio 4, said he’d spotted a link between relief and laughing when he noticed that, immediately after a successful revolution in a South American country, people ran out into the streets, laughing.

.

MATERIAL INSPIRED BY OTHERS THAT I NEVERTHELESS CALL MY OWN

This whole website was initially inspired by C.S. Lewis’ book Mere Christianity. But Mere Christianity and this website are so different that I call the result my own.

My webpage: The basic ways that God & Satan operate , , , was inspired by C.S. Lewis’ book The Screwtape Letters. But The Screwtape Letters and my webpage are so different that I call the result my own.

My webpages: Evidence that animals cannot evolve ,, to become humans , , , and: More evidence that animals cannot evolve ,, to become humans, , , , were inspired by Tony Buzan’s book Use Your Head, published by the BBC’s Open University in the 1970s (I read it in 1976). Although the book is ‘merely’ a set of students’ study tools and memory aids, it also: strongly emphasises that the mind is structured organically. ,, ,, ‘Organic’, here, meaning: like a spider’s web ,, ,, with the most important bits in the middle. This concept turned out to be vital when, years later, I started writing the above two, pivotal, webpages. ,, ,, Likewise, I read the book Lateral thinking years before I needed it. However, Use Your Head and my two webpages are so different that I call the result my own.

.

NATURAL EVENTS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS SITE

My webpage Idolatry, guilt projection, & evasiveness , , , was partly inspired by my experiences working in a Christian drug rehabilitation centre (1977-78): I saw how, in a junkie, when the drugs take over, extreme evasiveness is produced. They may con/rob loved ones and blank out the guilt and convince others, and even themselves, that nothing’s wrong.

That same webpage, Idolatry, guilt projection, & evasiveness, , , was also partly inspired by me falling in love, in the infatuated sense, on several occasions, when I was younger. I noticed that I was weirdly oblivious to the woman’s imperfections: could think of her only as perfect (this sometimes happened the other way around too). Whereas I now see only God as perfect.

.

SUPERNATURAL EVENTS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THIS SITE

As a young boy, four or five of us did a trick where one of us sat down and the rest of us pressed down on his/her head for a some minutes. Then we’d suddenly stop, and the ‘pressers’ would be able to lift the sitting person, out of the chair, using only one finger each, under each knee and armpit. The logic was: that the person suddenly felt very light so surely they were very light. And it worked. Subjectively, at the time, it seemed logical. But, objectively, I soon realised it was physically impossible and considered it weird. I now, being a Christian, consider it demonic.

At secondary school (1970 approx) my classmates held a séance. The surface was uneven, so I saw that the glass was being moved supernaturally. My classmates were asking subjective, personal, questions which I thought added to any danger. I merely risked asking how many coins were in my pocket. (I’d forgotten, and wanted to test whatever the thing/being was.) The glass suddenly picked up speed and went to ‘No’, repeatedly. This indicated, to me, intelligence & evasiveness.

My classmates wanted me to leave (I was spoiling things) and I reckoned the whole thing was potentially dangerous anyway, so I left. But, for the first time, I saw that things/events supernatural can exist. With hindsight, I see that séances: seem spiritual, seem of elsewhere, seem deep. But conversations with the dead are, ironically: still worldly, still, actually, of the hopes & fears of this life, soulish, not spiritual.

.

Again at secondary school, I noticed that I could tell which patterned card someone was looking at. It worked with people I liked, people like-minded to me, people I empathised with. Unlike the séance experience – it wasn’t disturbing. So I assumed it was telepathy.

A few years later, in 1974, at college, I took up this telepathy again. But this time, I noticed that I could see through the back of a playing card without anyone having looked at the front. It seemed to tire me. I could successfully do it only once an hour. I experimented with: Various materials: lead, plastic, steel, etc. A high voltage electric field (a toy electric shock machine). to try to block the ‘ray’ or whatever it was. But none of them stopped it, which was odd, considering the low voltage of the human nervous system.

Then I realised there was one factor I’d not thought of: time. This was easy to test, and, scarily, proved positive. I say ‘scarily’ because time travel puts the ability out of the realm of the natural and into the realm of the supernatural. It seemed to be: Me looking, at the card, in the future, to check my prediction. Then that image, going backwards, in time, to the present. This seemed to be the mechanics of it because the experience was such a visual one. But, whether the above was the case or not, it was eclipsed by my following observation.

I soon felt, and found, that the ability would only work: o Providing I let the ability grow vanity in me. o Providing I at least tried to see the ability as my own (even though I was increasingly aware that it was another doing it for me). o Providing I used the ability for amusement, self-glory, perhaps even income, rather than for something practical, anonymously, or at cost to me. o Providing I let it all: erode the reliability of knowledge, muddy science, for me, and perhaps for others. ,, ,, Perhaps see later section: TRICKS & MIRACLES , , , ,, ,, and the links within it. ,, ,, (This link does not open a new tab.)

The above proved, to me, the existence of an intelligent, manipulative, malevolent, being: Satan. They also proved that this Satan (though, more probably, it was merely an underling demon) hates structure: be it social structure, or knowledge, or understanding (the structuring of knowledge).

I deduced from the above that God must also exist. Such a destructive being as I’d met would not have created the universe. Try to destroy it – maybe. Try to damage it – probably. Abuse it – yes. Make it – no.

These conditions made ‘my’ new ability pathetic & disturbing. For example: I feared I might be given visions of people’s futures that included unavoidable disasters. So, after a few weeks delay (due to the pull of vanity) I stopped doing any of it.

So, in 1974, I concluded that there must be a God. But it wasn’t enough to make me become a Christian: I was a young man and wanted to enjoy life, wanted to wait until I was old, or at least older. However, two years later, early 1976, aged 21, problems hit my family that forced me to pray. God answered my prayer, with a small, but loving, miracle, and I was hooked, became a believer, a Christian. Indeed, it was: the loving nature of that miracle, indeed, that it challenged me to become loving, that got me hooked. My prayer was: “Please give me this God(Santa)”. But God’s reply, and perfect solution, was: “Love the person”.

.

My intellect has always been sound. But, foolishly, I’d sometimes listen to demons temptations and, emotionally rather than logically, respond positively to them. Hence, for example, in 1989, after my shift of washing-up in the kitchen, the office workers were starting a mostly-fancy-dress party in the staff restaurant. Las Vegas Casino was the theme. I thought I’d join in at the roulette table. “No harm in impressing people” my head said. But my heart was saying “You are the one about to be used.” I’d soon won several stacks of high value chips, and that aren’t I special, but I feel so lonely feeling came over me again, after all those years.

A player next to me said: “You certainly know how to play this game”. I thought, by way of reply: “This is a mug’s game. What’s to know? And I wouldn’t play if I couldn’t cheat. And I can’t tell you how I’m cheating because I’m so ashamed & because you’d want to impose tests on me. Worst of all, this is feeding my vanity: telling me I’m clever when I’m doing nothing.”

Ashamed and disenchanted, I started losing chips. I didn’t find out there’d been a prize (a giant Teddy Bear) until I’d lost them all. I’d have felt awful if I’d won and would have promptly given it away. And this, in 1989: fourteen years after becoming a Christian, eight years after starting this site. I should’ve known better. But I’d learnt my lesson. For example, I even throw away scratch cards that people give me, as a present, in case I win! If anyone supernaturally blesses me I want it to be only God. Demons will always welcome you back but you’ll always eventually regret it.

The symmetrical contrasts that I experienced between: Satan’s & demons’ aims & methods & God’s aims & methods, contributed to: the webpage: The basic ways that God & Satan operate, , , , notably to its section: TRICKS & MIRACLES , , , and to other parts of this site.

I use the experiences of wrong things I’ve done, if indeed they can be used, for enlightenment & for good: The apostle Paul had a useful arsenal of knowledge of Satan’s & demons’ ways partly because he had been used, by them, so much before he became a believer. 2 Cor c2 v11 Ironically it was his ‘religious’ teaching he dumped. Philippians c3 v8 Perhaps see: GOOD RELIGION & BAD RELIGION. , , ,

.

In 2005, sixteen years after the gambling fiasco, I had the task of getting rid of a ghost. A ghost that would physically do things. I failed. In 2006 other believers tried but their success lasted only three days. In 2007 a fellow Christian suggested that all of us pray the Lord’s Prayer, daily, together, because of the line: Luke c11 v4: ctd … deliver us from evil. KJV Interestingly – it worked, providing none of us did anything wrong that day. Then, in 2008, I went to hear Pastor Chris Oyakhilome at a big Pentecostal meeting, A Night Of Bliss, in London. I’d seen his TV programmes, but they only had the miracles. I wanted to experience a whole service: preaching, teaching, praise & worship, praying, as well as miracles. The meeting did not disappoint: people were getting out of wheelchairs etc. So, when I got back home, with an unselfconscious faith in God, I commanded the ghost, in Jesus’ name, to go away, and it did. It would come back, to do annoying things, but only very little things and only if one of us did something wrong. There’s nothing now.

.

Later that year (2008) I discovered Andrew Wommack, and increasingly decided that, of all the biblical teacher-healers I was discovering, his material is the most comprehensive & correct. I’ve listened to all of his audio teachings, read a number of his books, and learnt a great deal. I disagree with some of it. Perhaps see: I do not agree. , , , But I highly value the rest.

Since 2008, mainly as a result of listening to Andrew, I have, in Jesus’ name, healed a dozen or so people of small illnesses: sprains, migraines, stomach aches, etc. But that’s all, so far. I am a work in progress. As for how all this affects this website: From 1981 to 2008 this manuscript/site was: Purely philosophical. Not practical. Certainly not miraculous. From 2008 onwards: I also thought about the miraculous and added & integrated the results of that thinking into this site.

Sometimes, after I’d done some small miraculous healing, I’d see the effects of a demon conning the person into accepting their illness/injury back again. The second half of Andrew Wommack’s TV programme The Believer’s Authority: Episode 6, Jan 7^th 2013 tells us what to do about this. The above teaching of Andrew’s and the small miracles I’ve done so far inspired the section: UNBELIEF, & KEEPING YOUR HEALING. , , ,

.

In 2009 I planted a five-foot cherry tree in my garden. I planted it in a small pit of compost (should’ve used soil) in solid clay & a little topsoil. I also forgot to tease out the root-ball. As a result of all this it’s not grown much in the last 15 years. Photo taken April 2022.

In 2014 I thought: “If Andrew Wommack can repeatedly command a blessing on his mother’s pecan trees, so that they fruited, (see first half of the same TV programme The Believer’s Authority: Episode 6, Jan 7^th 2013) then I can do the same to my cherry tree.” So I’ve often commanded a blessing on it. Hence I believe, and expect, my cherry tree to, one day, miraculously become huge and full of cherries.

Some months later I thought: “We have pet guinea pigs (& then pet rabbits). Hence we let the lawn grow high, as food for them. But, any cherries that drop will get lost in the long grass. So I’ll have to mow at least some of the lawn.” So I thought: “How big will the tree be? How far will its branches extend? How much lawn do I need to mow? There’s a path very near the tree, with lawn (at that time) on both sides of it: Does the cherry-drop zone include the lawn on both sides of the path? Or should I cut the grass only on the tree side of the path?” Then I randomly opened my NIV Bible and immediately saw, within the verse Eze c31 v4 NIV, the phrase ‘all around its base’. The really neat thing about that phrase is that it is indeed all about a very big tree. I still sometimes used the NIV back in 2014. This was just as well since the KJV phrases it completely differently. (N.B. I’ve cut portions of grass, with scissors, for the pets. But I haven’t dared mow the lawn yet.)

.

MY ATTITUDE TO THE BIBLE

1) Where material evidence (not absence of material evidence) contradicts a part of the Bible then I say: “As this material evidence is true then that part of the Bible must be untrue.” Hence, for example, I say: “A number of sciences: cosmology, solar physics (nuclear physics), geology (plate tectonics), palaeontology, & zoology, not only speak for themselves, but also corroborate with each other: to show that the universe is billions of years old and started with a big bang. So the Bible’s account: that God made it about 6,000 years ago and that it took him only six days, is not true.” Mind you, see my section: TREAT THE BIBLICAL ADAM & EVE AS REAL. , , , I think that Christians who insist that: God made the universe in six days or even that the entire Bible is true, are mistaken. But, I notice that God responds to them exactly as if the entire Bible were indeed true.

2) I think that Jesus, being God’s only begotten Son, told God’s thoughts more authoritatively than other parts of the Bible tell God’s thoughts. So, where there is any difference, in letter or in spirit, between what Jesus says and what other parts say: then the Jesus parts are right and the other parts are wrong. For example, see: GOD’S WORDS ON SIN. ,, N.B. I don’t mean Old-Covenant-to-New-Covenant differences ,, that should be there. ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see later section: THE LORD’S PRAYER ,, ,, ,, and the links within it. ,, ,, ,, (This link does not open a new tab.) ,, I mean differences that get under Christians’ radar: ,, ,, ,, My ‘WHO AM I IN CHRIST?’ poster in my kitchen ,, ,, ,, has 20 verses on it. ,, ,, ,, All of them very edifying. ,, ,, ,, But I had to cross out two of them: ,, ,, ,, ,, Ps 107 v2 and Isa c46 v4, ,, ,, ,, ,, (the only two Old Testament ones as it happens) ,, ,, ,, because they promised safety ,, ,, ,, whereas Jesus foretold persecution for believers. ,, ,, ,, Perhaps see later webpage: Persecution. ,, ,,

3) Unlike Andrew Wommack, and indeed many Christians, I do not think that all non-Christians go to Hell. I wrote the webpage: The two ways God sorts us: ,, Judgment & Forgiveness , , , and the ten webpages after it to address this matter.

4) I disregard, and so do not use, Bible verses that are not in the earliest manuscripts, that were added centuries later by scribes or translators. See: BIBLE VERSES THAT I OMIT. , , , There are so few of them that me doing this is not as disastrous as it sounds. If the forged scripture is important, there are invariably other genuine scriptures that make the same point.

5) There are parts of the Bible where God himself writes something. (E.G. The Ten Commandments Deut c5 v6-22.) There are parts of the Bible where God himself says something. (E.G. To Moses Exo c33 v11.) But the rest of the Bible is ‘merely’ God inspired: was written by humans but under the inspiration of God’s Spirit. Though, having said that, there are a few parts of the Bible that are not even God inspired in my opinion. (E.G. Much of Ecc c1 – c6.) ,, The Bible is, of course, not one book but many documents/books. ,, They were prayerful selected (some were not included) ,, and prayerfully ordered.

6) To us, not all of the Bible is vital, or even important: For example, in Paul’s second letter to Timothy, the paragraph: 2 Tim c4 v13: The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments. KJV This verse was important to Paul but is of no importance to us.

.

7) Many preachers & teachers see the Bible as chronologically homogenous. But technically speaking, regarding the supernatural, the Bible spans three eras: 1) Pre-Jesus era: when the Father did miraculous good and bad. 2) Jesus’ ministry era: when Jesus did only miraculous good. 3) Spirit-in-believers era: when believers do only miraculous good. Hence: during the four gospels: Jesus hadn’t yet been crucified & risen, so he had not yet earned us God’s Spirit. So his crucifixion in our place could not yet be believed in. So he could not preach ‘believe’ as something people could do. He could only preach ‘repent’ as something people could do. However: post-Pentecost: Believing in Jesus’ crucifixion could be done. And his crucifixion had earned us the Holy Spirit who would help you renew your mind. And a renewed mind would cause: doing good and not doing bad. Hence preaching repentance became unnecessary. Hence, in Acts, repentance is only preached to unbelievers. Likewise, in Heb c6 v1-2, Paul urges his Christian readers to move on, from repentance, to perfection.

Thinking of the Bible as one item results in preaching repentance the same way Jesus preached it (Mark Hemans does this). And a renewed mind is a rather abstract concept. Hence many Christians don’t embrace it but instead fall into, even embrace, some sin or other. Hence, for them, preachers like Mark Hemans do well to preach repentance instead of preaching a renew your mind. However, the idea that we need to repent of sins implies that sins still exist. And believing that sins still exist can erode, in a logical mind, the belief that Jesus’ crucifixion made all sins, past present & future, disappear. It may leave you wrongly thinking that: un-confessed sins still exist, or: only sins before you believed are gone, or: or only sins before you were baptized are gone, etc.

.

To conclude: If you can cope with things being logical, even insist on it, then: wherever the New Testament, i.e. from Pentecost onwards: says ‘sins’ read it as ‘wrongs’. See the webpage: How God Forgave us all.,,, and the section: THE TWO ACCOUNTS.,,,, and instead of thinking: ‘repent of your sins’, think: ‘renew your mind’. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, See: ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, YouTube: – Best description of the Gospel - Dan Mohler. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, and: ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, YouTube: – The Gospel, straight up, no additives. ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, See third from last, & second from last, paragraphs ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, of: ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, Hell-A Reality Or A Metaphor? By Andrew Wommack.

But, if you don’t think all the time and don’t insist on things being logical, and if you think you might sin, do wrong, then: think: “Jesus made all sins disappear” (which implies that sins cannot exist now) yet also think: “I must repent of that sin” (which implies that sins can exist now). Perhaps again see: THE TWO ACCOUNTS.,,,,,

.

Home page