Lies, damned lies, statistics and the importance of truth

OIKOS is a fantastic ecumenical initiative in Brigg, that run a Christian shop, a Food Bank, a Community Pantry and more!  I was asked to write some short 'thoughts to start your week' for July 2024 for their Facebook page. This is an expanded version of the thought for 14th July.

Picture by Carolyn Dyk – Wycliffe Bible Translators

There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics – so goes the famous proverbial saying; 

Mark Twain attributed it to Benjamin Disraeli, but it has not been found in his writings, and in any case the saying, or some form of it has been found earlier than Disraeli.  But it sprang to mind listening to the pre-election debates where all the parties made various statistical claims about their own policies and disputing the statistics of their opponents.  And even in the aftermath of the General Election statistics are still flying about, again utilised by various people to shore up their viewpoint. There are arguments over vote share, seats won, voter turnout and other issues, which all show that statistics, though often true, are not 'the whole truth and nothing but the truth.'

Even the church is not immune from this: the Church of England recently trumpeted that the most recent church attendance figures has gone up for the second year running – which is true; however, what they didn't say as loudly was that attendance still hasn't returned to pre-pandemic levels.

It's easy to be cynical and despair at politicians and other public figures who use statistics, shall we say, 'creatively' or 'selectively' but we should perhaps consider their use of statistics and use it as a mirror to hold up to ourselves. Because all of us curate an image of ourselves that may be true, but is not the whole truth. Social media is probably the most obvious example of this, where we show the world our 'best' selves, and the 'best' parts of our life (and food!).  But we often do this too in the non-digital world: we tell the best stories about ourselves; we brag (in a humble way) about our achievements; and we impart our superior intelligence, knowledge and wisdom.  The way we look and dress; the things we put in our homes or gardens; the cars we drive (or don't drive); the places we go to and the people we are seen with all contribute to the way we present ourselves and project the image of ourselves that we want others to see.  These images and presentations are often true, though in being perhaps exaggerations of the truth, and only selective truths, they cannot be said to be the whole truth.

It seems to me that we do this because we are afraid that if people knew the whole truth about us, they would not want to be around us.  It is telling that in the Genesis account of the fall of humanity, after grasping for the 'knowledge of good and evil' (i.e. wanting the ability to decide for themselves what is right and wrong rather than trusting God), the first thing Adam and Eve do is cover themselves and hide (Genesis 3:7-8).  In wanting the power to judge they end up judging themselves and wanting to present a different version of themselves than the literal naked truth.  

But although we may be able to fool others, we cannot fool God: he is the one "to whom all hearts are open, all desires known and from whom no secrets are hidden" (Prayer of Preparation from the Holy Communion service) and the BCP Morning Prayer Service says we should "acknowledge and confess our manifold sins and wickedness; and that we should not dissemble nor cloke them before the face of Almighty God our heavenly Father."  Psalm 139 reminds us that God knows everything about us, including our sins – and the amazing thing is that he still loves us!   Chris Tomlin has written a worship song called 'Indescribable' that ends with these great lyrics, addressed to God: "You see the depths of my hart and you love me the same, you are amazing God!"  He wants us to change and turn away from our sin, but our sin doesn't stop him loving us.  He sees the whole truth about us, but we don't need to hide, instead he says to us:

  ‘Come now, let us settle the matter,’

    says the Lord.

‘Though your sins are like scarlet,

    they shall be as white as snow;

though they are red as crimson,

    they shall be like wool.' (Isaiah 1:18)

 

Elections, Euros and almost certain disappointment!

Here's an extended version of my article for July:

This month there will be two competitions: the General Election and the football European Championships – I'll leave you to decide which is the more important!  One thing both competitions have in common is that the majority of people will be disappointed with the result.  Obviously only one country's team can win the Euros, leading to heartbreak for the other finalist, and the other teams who don't even get that far.  However it's easy to forget this truth with the General Election because we live in a democracy and so assume that the outcome of the election is the 'will of the people.' So it comes as a bit of a shock to realise that since the end of WWII no party has won the General Election with over 50% of the vote (and of course not everyone who's eligible to vote does vote). So although the question of who we vote for is really important, we might also want to ask ourselves how we will respond when statistically we are more likely to be disappointed with the result.

Christianity, unlike Islam and pre-exilic Judaism, has no codes for government as it is not meant to be a 'state religion': Jesus calls his followers into the Kingdom of God, which he says “is not of this world” (John 18:36). The New Testament gives no guidance on what a Christian government would look like, what laws it should enact, nor by what mechanism that government should get its power.  Nor does it tell us, if we have a say in choosing the government, what questions or issues should take priority in our choice, nor what the character of those governing should be.  However, it does tell us that we should pray for the coming of God's Kingdom where his will is done on earth (Matthew 6:9-10); and it does tell us the character traits of those who belong to the Kingdom (e.g. 1 Corinthians 13:1-7) and the sorts of values they should hold (e.g. Colossians 1:9-14.)  But as it is very rare that candidates for election are members of God's Kingdom, and no political party fully reflects the values of the Kingdom - even if the candidate we vote for and their party wins, we are still likely to be disappointed!!

The realisation that we will be disappointed is a great corrective to the inflated sense of the importance of our own views that democracy gives us. We should always have freedom to hold and express our views, but we should also have the humility to listen to other people's views, being open to changing our minds and having the grace to let others change their minds too.  Most importantly though we should read God's word in the Bible so that we are shaped by his thoughts and not “conform to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of [our] mind” (Romans 12:2) “then we will no longer be infants, tossed back and forth by the waves, and blown here and there by every wind of teaching and by the cunning and craftiness of people in their deceitful scheming” (Ephesians 4:14).

The New Testament is also more concerned with our attitude towards those in power, however they got it.  Paul and Peter tell us to submit to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1; 1 Peter 2:13), which is even more shocking since the Roman Emperor was the supreme governing authority, and Paul also calls us to pray for the authorities (1 Timothy 2:1-2).  However, we shouldn't obey the authorities if they are telling us to do something that goes against God's commands (Acts 5:29).  If Paul expects the churches to honour an Emperor who was clearly against God's Kingdom, “to slander no one [including the authorities], to be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone” (Titus 3:2), how much more should we honour all those who work in public office, regardless of whether we completely agree with them?

So let's not allow our inevitable disappointment (either with politics or football!) to express itself in cynicism, insults and derogatory comment, but instead let's pray for all in authority, that through them God's Kingdom may come and his will be done.

Left image by John Mounsey from Pixabay 

Right image by Prawny from Pixabay 

Should God get credit for D-Day?

Here's an extended version of my magazine article for this month:

This month we will be commemorating the 80th anniversary of D-Day, the day the Allied troops landed in France to begin the counter-offensive against the Nazis.  Facing them was a vast defensive network of artillery, gun emplacements, mines and other deadly obstacles stretching from the west coast of France up to Norway, known as the “Atlantic Wall”.  Ernie Pyle, a war correspondent who was there at the time, said that the Allies attacked “with every advantage on the enemy’s side and every disadvantage on ours.”  Pyle concluded, “Now that it is all over, it seems to me a pure miracle that we ever took the beach at all.”  

We will be rightly admiring the bravely of those who attacked against such great odds, as well as the intelligence of those who devised both the invasion and the equipment needed for it.  But will God get any credit for the success of D-Day and its aftermath?

Invoking deities in battles is probably as old as human conflict itself, with victories being seen as evidence of the superiority of one nation's god(s) over another's.  When Sennacherib king of Assyria attacked Judah, his commander said to the people of Jerusalem ““Do not listen to Hezekiah [king of Judah], for he is misleading you when he says, ‘The Lord will deliver us.’ Has the god of any nation ever delivered his land from the hand of the king of Assyria?” (2 Kings 18:32-33) In this case God did indeed deliver Judah (2 Kings 19:32-37).

Things get a bit more complicated however in the age of Christendom when the nations fighting against each other claimed to follow the same God, most famously perhaps with the Spanish Armada aiming to reclaim England for the 'true (Roman Catholic) faith' but being defeated in part by a 'Protestant wind.'  And in World War I both sides claimed God was on their side.  However, in World War II the Nazis rejected the traditional Judeo-Christian God and their policies made it easy for the Allies to claim that they were fighting against an evil regime.  So, coming to D-Day it was natural for the Allied hierarchy to invoke God to their cause.  

Eisenhower requested to the troops that “all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking”; Montgomery told the troops, “Let us pray that the Lord, mighty in battle, will give us victory”; Roosevelt offered a prayer rather than a speech  saying “In this poignant hour, I ask you to join with me in prayer”; and George VI said “I desire solemnly to call my people to prayer and dedication.”

Arguably the prayers worked.  The bad weather, which had led to the invasion being postponed, abated but also meant the Germans were not expecting the invasion.  Indeed a lot of their commanders left for war games exercises in Brittany, and Rommel, who was in charge of the Normandy defences, decided to travel 500 miles to Germany to celebrate his wife’s birthday. As Pyle observed, although still horrific, Allied casualties “were remarkably low—only a fraction, in fact, of what our commanders had been prepared to accept.”

So did God intervene miraculously on the Allied side on D-Day? The Bible reveals a God who cares about what happens in the affairs of nations and will intervene (Daniel 2:20-21), but we ought not to be too quick to recruit God to our cause.  As George VI wisely said on D-Day: “We are not unmindful of our shortcomings of the past and present. We shall not ask that God may do our will, but that we may be enabled to do the will of God; and we dare to believe that God has used [us] as an instrument for fulfilling his high purpose.” And when he does use us as an instrument we should, as Churchill told the House of Commons after the war had been won, “give humble and reverent thanks to Almighty God for our deliverance.”

“It would be better if I weren't here”

Here's my article for May:

“It would be better if I weren't here.”  This is often the heart-rending opinion of those who take their own lives. And the consequence of allowing forms of assisted suicide might be that terminally ill people are forced to think the same about themselves, seeing themselves as a burden to their families or society.  Whatever the circumstances of this opinion, it is always tragic.  Which is why it seems odd that Jesus said words to that effect to his disciples.

After his resurrection, Jesus spent forty days with his disciples, eating and drinking with them and also appearing to others (Acts 10:40-41; 1 Corinthians 15:3-8) and then went back to his Father, which we celebrate on Ascension Day.  However, before he died he was preparing his disciples for this final departure and said to them “very truly I tell you, it is for your good that I am going away” (John 16:7).  I wonder if the disciples forgot this and perhaps one of the things he reminded them during those forty days was that it would be better for them for him to go away.  If so, I wonder if it puzzled them?

It might puzzle us too.  Surely it would be better for Jesus to have stayed on earth? Now he'd been resurrected he would be immortal and could carry on teaching and healing forever.  We could go to see him preach or witness his miracles; he could have his own TV, YouTube and TikTok channel; we could even 'follow' him on Facebook and Instagram, or read his tweets.  As Judas sings in 'Jesus Christ Superstar': “Why'd you choose such a backward time in such a strange land? / If you'd come today you could have reached a whole nation. / Israel in 4 BC had no mass communication.”

Many people say to me that they would believe in Jesus if he would only appear to them, though of course many people met Jesus during his earthly ministry, heard his teaching and saw his miracles but still didn't believe in him.  However, Jesus himself says why it was better for him to leave: “Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.” - he's talking about the Holy Spirit, whose arrival we celebrate at Pentecost.  

In this sense, the Holy Spirit is better for us than Jesus because Jesus didn't lose his humanity when he was resurrected – he was raised physically with a body that could eat and drink and which still bore the marks of his crucifixion (John 20:27).  Therefore, like us, he could only be in one place at one time: he could only be beside us, whereas the Holy Spirit can dwell within everyone who believes in Jesus.  And one of the tasks of the Holy Spirit within us is to remind us that we are loved and valued by God no matter what we or others think about us.

Which myths colour our present and shape our future?

Here's my article for the April magazines:

One of the ways I like to relax is by reading books on history. I don't really have a favourite period, but I do tend to prefer the history of the British Isles and I've just started to read about the period in which the legends of King Arthur are set. These legends are part of the founding myths of our islands, and help us to get a sense of identity that in turn gives us a way to view the present and shape the future.

Initially, Arthur was a Celtic/British leader who fought against the invading Anglo-Saxons: a 'Welsh' king fighting the (future) 'English'; prophesied by an earlier legend of a red dragon (Arthur) defeating the white dragon (the Saxons), which is immortalised in the Welsh flag. Thus Arthur was the inspirer of the struggle of the native Britons against the latest attackers.

Edward I was an Arthurian enthusiast who saw the power of a triumphant “once and future” Welsh king to inspire Welsh resistance to his campaign to conquer Wales. So he asserted his dominance over Arthur by digging up and reburying the alleged remains of Arthur and Guinevere at Glastonbury. But conversely he also used the example of Arthur as King of Britain to justify his desire to subjugate Wales and Scotland.

His grandson Edward III modelled his new 'Order of the Garter' on Arthur's Knights of the Round Table. He also replaced his royal predecessors Edmund the Martyr and Edward the Confessor as patron saints of England with George the soldier-saint, thus giving rise to another myth that has shaped the identity of the English nation.

We all have founding 'myths' that shape our personal identity. Some are grounded in our nationality or ethnicity; some are stories of more recent ancestors; some stem from our early childhood experiences. All of these 'myths' can make us feel trapped into certain patterns of thought or behaviour; or, as Edward I shows us, can be manipulated to justify our desires.

The Bible shows us a better way. The Creation story in Genesis tells us that our identity should be fundamentally based on the truth that we are made in the image and likeness of God, and our ultimate happiness is to be found in a living relationship with him. This relationship was destroyed through our sin but restored through Jesus' death and resurrection. So now, through repentance and faith in Jesus we can be shaped once again by being in the image and likeness of God and having a living relationship with him. It is only this that gives us “strength for today and bright hope for tomorrow.”

Image: King Arthur's Round Table at Winchester Castle from Wikimedia Commons

Life is the name of the game

Here's my March article:

When I was young, I noticed how older people would often tell the same stories or talk about the same subjects over and over again.  Now I'm an older person, I find myself doing it too; repeating stories and subjects.  A few weeks ago I was talking to someone about my magazine articles and I realised how often I write on the subject of death!   I don't think I have a particularly morbid interest in death, but I am fascinated by people's beliefs about death, especially those who don't identify themselves as being 'religious.'  And so, despite Good Friday being a perfect opportunity to talk about death again, I'm going to restrain myself and instead focus this month on Easter and on life.

As Brucie said, “life is the name of the game” and this is certainly true of the Christian faith: the most famous verse in the Bible, John 3:16, tells us that “God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.”  Jesus talks about the small gate and narrow path that leads to life, which only a few find (Matthew 7:14) and declares that he is the way, the truth and the life (John 14:6).  He says that “my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son [Jesus] and believes in him shall have eternal life” (John 6:40). But this eternal life is not 'pie in the sky when you die' Jesus also says “I have come that [those who listen to me] may have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10).  Indeed, Peter describes life without belief in Jesus as an “empty way of life” (1 Peter 1:18).

We all have a deep yearning for life (dare I say that this is why even those who are 'not religious' cling to a belief that life continues in some way after death?) because God did not create us to die.  The apostle Paul reminds us that death came into the world through the sin of Adam, but that Jesus' death atoned for sin and his resurrection brings new life in the present and eternal life in the future to those who believe in him (Romans 5 and 6).  Thus what was lost in the Garden of Eden is restored and the new heavens and the new earth described in Revelations 21 and 22 are characterised by life in intimate communion with God.

We yearn for life because God has placed eternity in our hearts (Ecclesiastes 3:11).  But we often look for fullness of  life in the wrong places - in family, jobs, achievements, wealth, popularity, health or... But, as the angels said to the women at Jesus' tomb that first Easter day “Why do you look for the living among the dead?” (Luke 24:5)  So if you want life, come to Jesus who is the resurrection and the life (John 11:25).

I am what I am

Here's my February magazine article:

Lent is often a time for introspection and self-examination; a time for assessing one's life. Three common responses to this self-reflection centre around the phrase: “I am what I am”.

The first use of this phase is a pessimistic resignation: “I don't like who I am but I can't change it (even though I've tried)”.

The second is the more common use, signified by the hit song of that title from the musical La Cage aux Folles. Used this way the phrase is a celebratory declaration of pride in who you are, warts and all, and regardless of what anyone else thinks about it.

The third use, perhaps surprisingly, is to be found in the Bible: in 1 Corinthians 15:10, the Apostle Paul says “by the grace of God, I am what I am”. Although the second use is also sometimes given a religious overtone: “I am the way God made me”, the way Paul uses it is completely different. He is talking about his status as an Apostle, one of the select group who were acknowledged as having the highest teaching authority in the early Church. He says that because he used to persecute the Church he shouldn't be called an apostle, but he is because of God's grace, God's undeserved favour, and not because of anything Paul himself can take credit for. Paul knows he's been given a position he doesn't deserve, so the glory for who he is is God's alone.

Paul's phrase was picked up hundreds of years later by John Newton, the slave-trader-turned-abolitionist who wrote “Amazing Grace”. Towards the end of his life he is quoted as saying “though I am not what I ought to be, nor what I wish to be, nor what I hope to be, I can truly say, I am not what I once was; a slave to sin and Satan; and I can heartily join with the apostle, and acknowledge, 'By the grace of God I am what I am.' ” In his self-examination he acknowledges his faults but neither despairs at them nor celebrates them. Instead he looks at how through God's grace and help he has repented and is reforming and will continue to do so.

Anyone who honestly examines themselves will agree with Newton's assessment: “I am not what I ought to be, nor what I wish to be, nor what I hope to be” because “if we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us” (1 John 1:8). The choice then is what we do with this assessment: do we despair that we could ever change, or do we celebrate our sins as being essential parts of who we are? Or do we, with Paul and Newton, acknowledge our failings and repent of them in the knowledge that “if we confess our sins, God is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.” (1 John 1:9)