Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists

Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists

Concise Edition

By David Clarke

ISBN: 978-0-9539473-2-4

Published October 2012

Abshott Publictions 11 Hayling close Fareham Hampshire

PO14 3AE e-mail:

Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists, Concise Edition

ISBN: 978-0-9539473-9-3

Authors introduction

The first part of my story is told in, Converted on LSD, Extended Edition. In which I tell my life, story with that of my brother Michael, and our early life in Aylesbury. Although we were born in Oldham we moved, with our parents, to the south of England, in 1954.

Michael and I became criminals and were both sentenced to prison in the 60’s, for malicious wounding and carrying a fire arm without a license.

I experience a bad trip on LSD, on the 16th January 1970, and I called on the name of the Lord to help me. The Lord Jesus spoke to me and I was converted from crime to Christ that night.

The whole story is recounted in my earlier book

Converted on LSD Trip.

This part of my store tells of my joining the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists, in 1976. I tell of my experience and growth in grace and the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ and recount the various difficulties I face in seeking to follow Jesus Christ as best as I could. The book tells of my life as a member of the Bierton Strict and Particular

Church until my secession in 1984 where upon I write my first book entitled, The Bierton Crisis, that tells in detail my reasons for secession.

I speak about serious doctrinal issues that I faced during my time of leaning the gospel and being able to distinguish between true and false religion.

It is believed that his book will be of great help to any one seeking to follow the Lord Jesus Christ and who will obey the gospel.

  1. Bierton Particular Baptists

    After a short while I wrote to the church expressing my wish to join the church at Bierton, as I believed that I had that responsibility having experience the new birth and being baptized. I reasoned that I ought to support the cause of Christ at Bierton.

    I was received into church membership at the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church on 8th January 1976.

    A problem arose because in the articles of faith that were given to me were not those listed in the trust deed of 1831 and I could not subscribe to them. There were two articles that I could not subscribe too.

    Mr Hill of Luton Ebenezer helps the Church

    I discussed my concerns and misgivings with Mr Hill, the Pastor of Luton Ebenezer church, who fully understood my concerns and after looking at the original articles of faith, for the Bierton Church, it was realized that there was no record as to how these articles had come into existence. So the church was bound to be subject to their original

    articles of religion. These were listed in their trust deed of 1831 and these did not contain these items I could not, in conscience subscribe too.

    The church was please to allow me to join them upon my confession faith and my acceptance of the original Articles of Religion, and not the spurious ones. There was in fact no record of how these other articles of faith came to be in use.

    Articles of Religion I find a problem

    Article 12. We believe that Christ has set apart a day of rest, to be kept holy, and for his honour and glory, which is the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday, Mark 2 27. Acts 16 13. Hebrew 4,


    I did not believe that was true or that these scripture taught that.

    Article 16. We believe all infants who die in their infancy go to heaven by virtue of the death of Christ. Matt. 19 13, 14&15.

    Again I could not say I believed this. I grant if they do go to heaven then is must be by virtue of

    the death of Jesus. These scriptures quoted do not teach this view.

    A Church member dies

    Sadly, soon after I joined the church at Bierton, the husband of Mrs Evered died, who was a church member, and I was invited to the family funeral. I was later invited to the family home in Aylesbury and on that occasion I was asked to share my testimony, at the family meeting, after the funeral to which, I felt privileged to do. It was here that I met the Groom family, who were members of the Prestwood Strict Baptist church and had moved to Brighton.

    I am introduced to Mr Sperling-tyler

    I had previously met Pastor Mr Sperling Tyler, at a meeting at the Prestwood Strict Baptist Chapel, in 1975, when Mrs Evered introduced me to Mr Sperling-tyler, soon during my early days of joining the Bierton Church. On that occasion Mr Tyler was very gracious and asked me had I found the lord Jesus Christ as my personal saviour to which I replied, “ No but rather He had found me”.

    I am introduced to Pastor Frank L. Gosden


    Mr Frank L Gosden Galeed Chapel Brighton

    Mr Frank L. Gosden was the Pastor of the Church at Gilead where Mr and Mrs Groom were in attendance and they wanted me to meet their pastor. Frank L. Gosden also pastored churches at Heathfield (1939-1957) and Gilead, Brighton (1959-1980). Mr. Gosden once said that he believed a twofold test could be applied to every preacher: Will the things he speaks be things that will matter when we come to die? And will the things he speaks

    be a help to a poor, broken-hearted sinner?

    Galeed Chapel Brighton


    Galeed Chapel Brighton

    Mr and Mrs Groom and Mrs Evered arranged for me to visit Mr Gosden, in order for me to share with him my experience of conversion and I was very honoured to do this. We spent the afternoon together, at his very modest home, and he gave me a gift when I was leaving. It was his very own personal copies of Dr. John Gill’s commentaries of the whole bible, in 6 volumes, for which I felt

    very privileged to receive. And this became my source of instruction ever since. At that time I have obtained a very old copy of William Huntington’s book entitled the Everlasting Love of God towards His Elect. On reading this it became very clear that the Arminians were in the dark and I felt if only I could talk to them then the opposition that I had experienced from those that I had met at Lowestoft would surely disappear and the news be received with gladness. Mr Groom commented on my reading the book expressing he felt it very deep reading. I can recommend this to any one to read.

    Before Mr Frank L. Gosden was the pastor of Gilead church in Brighton Mr J K Popham (1847 to 1947) was their pastor who was the former editor of the Gospel Standard.

    For 55 years pastor of Gilead Chapel Brighton. Editor of the Gospel Standard from 1905 -1937. Besides being a minister of the gospel he was a gifted writer and theologian. He was called upon to deal with many controversial issues of the times. His booklet Spiritual Counsel to the Young is still in print as are many of his sermons. A book on the life of letters of J.K. Popham was written by J.H.


    Under the title ‘Valiant For Truth’


    James Kidwell Popham 1847-1937

  2. A visitor from John Metcalfs group

    On one of these occasions we had a visitor from the group meeting at the Bethlehem Meeting hall, at Penn, where John Metcalf, was their Pastor. I learned one or two things from our visitor, who was called James. He was a former Scotts Presbyterian and I think from the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland whom I learned were renowned Calvinists. These I learned and opposed the Gospel Standard views of the none-offer of the Gospel and also the view that the Law of Moses was not the rule of life for the believer. They held to a view of a free offer of Christ to all men, a view I could not go along with, as Christ died for the elect only. Christ was to be preached to the entire world but He was not on offer.

    The Law of Moses not the rule of life for the believer

    Also I knew that the Law could not be the rule of life for the believer because of their union to him in His death and resurrection whereby they are delivered form the Law of sin and death and had rule of life which was the whole gospel of Christ

    the perfect law of liberty.

    James informed me that the Presbyterians were against John Metcalf and his teaching because he too like William Huntington taught, like the Gospel Standard article convey that the Law was not the rule of life for the believer but rather the gospel was. This I agreed was the truth.

    James came to our weeknight prayer meeting; his name was James and he later informed me that he wanted to hear Mr Sperling-tyler preach, who was the Pastor of the church meeting at the Dicker. So I agreed to take him one Lord’s Day. He had a problem though, because I worked for Granada TV Rentals and I had a company vehicle which, had the name of my company written on the side of the car. This was an embarrassment to him as he was acutely aware of the disapproval of many, who were opposed to any church member who had a television set. He wanted me to park the vehicle away from the chapel car park, so as not to show we were connected with the chapel. I felt slightly irritated with this mode of thinking but was sensitive enough to know how much he felt embarrassed, so we parked my company car out

    of the way. We then heard Mr Tyler speak in the Morning, afternoon and evening. Meetings of the church. It was here that I met the son of Mr Tyler and his wife who both attended the Linslaid Strict Baptist church.

    Television a concern for many

    In respect to the television I began to realize this had become an issue, not only amongst the Strict Baptists but also the Brethren. I had reason to consider the whole matter at a later date,

    Zoar Strict Baptist Chapel


    Zoar Strict Baptist Chapel, Lower Dicker

    This was built in 1837 and enlarged in 1874. There is an extensive graveyard on three sides

    Not all the preaching at Bierton was good

    Our visiting preaches came from various local and far away places and only a few were from Gospel Standard causes, let alone gospel standard listed ministers. As I recall the names of some of visiting preached, we shall see who were from Gospel

    Standard causes and who were listed ministers.

    Our Ministers were:

    Mr Hill, Luton, Pastor of Ebenezer Luton and one of our Trustee’s GS

    Mr Collier, Pastor Linslaid Bethel Strict and Particular Baptist GS

    Mr Goode, Pastor, Dunstable Baptist

    Mr Martin Hunt, Colnebrook Gospel Standard

    Mr King, minister, Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist (Trustee)

    Mr C. A Wood, Pastor Croydon, Strict and Particular Baptist GS

    Mr Hope, Pastor Reading, Strict and Particular Baptist

    Mr Howard Sayers, minister, Watford Strict and Particular Baptist GS

    Mr Crane, minister, Lakenheath Strict and Particular

    Mr Tim Martin, minister, Blunham Strict and Particular Baptist

    Mr Levy, minister and Deacon, of Dunstable Baptist

    Mr John Gosden, minister Southbourgh

    Mr Lawrence, Evangelical from Harold

    Mr Ramsbottom, Pastor Luton Bethel, and Gospel Standard editor GS

    Mr Scott Person, Pastor, Baptist

    Mr Baumber, minister Bedford Providence, Strict and Baptist (Trustee)

    MrTimMartin,BlunhamStrictBaptist(Trustee) Mr Sayers, Pastor, Watford Strict and Particular


    Mr Dawson, Strict and Particular Baptist

    Mr Tanton, Tenterdon Strict Baptist

    Mr Gould, minister, Limes Avenue Baptist

    Mr Dix, pastor Dunstable Baptist and Trinitarian Bible Society representative

    Mr Terence Brown, minister and Secretary of the Trinitarian Bible Society

    Mr Redhead, minister of Pottern End?

    Mr J Buss, senior GS

    Mr Gerald Buss, minister Strict and Particular Baptist

    Mr Howe, Pastor of Ivanhoe Particular Baptist

    Mr Paul Rowland, (Presbyterian leanings)

    Mr. G. Ashdown, of the Protestant Alliance A Range of doctrinal differences

    It became apparent to me, through listening to the various visiting ministers and my conversations with them, that we had a range of ministers with differing degrees of understanding of scripture. Some had and held opposing views to each other. We had those who held to the 1689 confession of faith some the 1966 Strict Baptist confession, some who were convinced of the Presbyterian position.

    Some holding to “duty faith and repentance” and one who could not accept the Bierton Articles of Religion of 1831.

    I am appointed as secretary and correspondent

    There came a time when we need a correspondent and Secretary and I agree to take on this role and had the responsibility of engaging minister for the coming year. It was all-new to me and found it very difficult and a real sense of responsibility.

    I had to deal with a request expressing in a letter from Colnebrook Strict and Particular Baptist Church who had where informed the church (via me the secretary) that of one of there members, Mr Martin Hunt was under censorship. Martin Hunt was one of our visiting ministers, who I found to be a very nice and polite man and had a good understanding of scripture. How ever Mr King and I were asked by the church to speak to Martin about this issue being raised and it was difficult to understand the problem. It was to do with particular redemption so in the end I asked Martin if he could subscribe to our Bierton Articles of Religion of 1831. His reply was no he could not. This resolved the matter and the Church decided not to invite

    Martin to preach again. This helped us not to judge this issue he had with his church but rather enabled us to respond to the concerns of the Colnebrook Church in the correct way.

    I read the former Church minutes a cause of concern

    It was my responsibility as secretary to keep church minute and the church book and during this time I was able read the issues that had been spoken about and the decision that were made before I became a member. I was shocked to find the Mr and Mrs Evered had put forward motions to prevent certain visiting ministers from preaching due to un-substantiated beliefs about their conduct. I knew that this would be contrary to the gospel and so I raised the matter with the church and stated the need to put the matter right. Unfortunately to one member who was implicated in this form of slander was so upset it was felt best to leave the matter as it was. I realized from that moment I had crossed Mrs Evered.

    I continued being the secretary and correspondent until I married and moved briefly away to Leicester.

  3. Caterham Strict Baptist Holiday

I meet my wife

It was during this time in 1976 and felt loneliness and fell into depression and friend’s of Alan Benning, Paul and Susan Aston invited me to go with them on holiday with a Christian group, to Switzerland. Paul was a student at a Watford Evangelical Bible College and so I went. It was on that holiday that I was made more aware of a holiday being arranged by Caterham Strict Baptist being, held at the Elim Pentecostal Bible College, at Capel. It was here that I met my wife to be that year who is Irene Protheroe, from Shepherd in Leicestershire where Paul Cook was the Pastor of the Evangelical Church.

I meet other Evangelical doctrinal differences

My wife Irene had lived in Coventry and introduced me to her Christian friends including the Minister and Pastor of Holbrook’s Evangelical Church. Here I meet good friends who had a desire to follow the Lord however in discussion they

realized my

views on predestination,



the relationship of the


to the Law of Moses and the none offer of the gospel proved a divide between us. How ever we were able to discuss matters and agree to differ. These conversations enlightened me further to the differences between the Evangelicals and Strict and Particular Baptists and exclusive position of the views expressing in the Gospel Standard Articles of Religion. I was being cast into the mold of the Gospel Standard Baptists. I also learned that the minister of the London Evangelical Church called Westminster Chapel, where Dr Martin Lloyd Jones was a minster was now R.T. Kendal who taught a 4 point Calvinist position namely not particular Redemption.

Preparation for marriage

We were engaged to be married in December 1977 and I had obtained a place on the Technical Teacher Training Course as Wolverhampton Teacher Training College. I resigned from my job at Granada TV Rentals and I moved into student lodgings at the college.

Mean while we purchased a house in Wigston at 64B Moat Street, which turned out as a good buy.

Regarding marriage Counselling

During the time and lead up to my Marriage I was really concerned about the idea of birth control, as in conscience I was uncertain as its morality. In this connection I asked our only male married church member about the subject. I was very embarrassed but had to settle the matter for conscience sake. To my dismay the only response and reply to the question was, “moderation in all things”. This was my answer to a very serious question.

Our first home


64B Moat Street Wigston

This is the first house we purchased and Irene lived here whilst I was living in student lodgings at Wolverhampton and me move in together the

on our wedding day, 9th December 1976.


I married my wife Irene Protheroe on the 9th December 1977 and the wedding took Place at Bethel Evangelical Church at Wigston.

Bethel Evangelical Church


Bethel Evangelical Church

Our move to Luton

My first teaching post was at Luton College of Higher Education and I commenced lecturing in Electronics in September 1978. And we were able to rent a council house at Lewsy Farm in Dunstable.

The funny thing was that we were obtained permission form the council to keep our two goats in the coal shed in the rear garden building in Wigston were we were married on December 1976

Our move to Linslaid

My concern was that I wanted to be in a church with a Pastor particularly now that I had a wife who had been just introduced to the Strict Baptists, so I decided we should attend the Linslaid Strict and Particular Baptist church where Mr Collier was the pastor. We continued here for as short, while when we realized it would be more economical to purchase a house in Linslaid and I travel to Luton to work. In that case we would be near the local church. And so we were able to buy our house called “Fairholme”’ for £14,000 with a mortgage in Linslaid.

Our home In Linslaid


Our home in Linslaid “Fair holme”, Queen Street

The Isle of Skye and the Presbyterian Churches

It was my desire to visit Scotland and some of the Presbyterian Churches we rented an old school house in Waternish on the Isle of Skye and we had to cross to the island on a ferry to Porter to get there. It turned out that the Old School house had

belonged to Donavan who was a pop star during the 60’s. It was a very quite place but very peaceful building at Staffing where I answered the question.. We were not aware at the time that the Presbyterian churches celebrate their communion twice a year and that particular “Sabbath” as they called it was the occasion of their “Mount of Ordinances”. It was their communion to be held in the morning of that day. We attended the meeting in the morning and we were made very welcome and were asked where we were from.

Free Presbyterian Church


Free Presbyterian Church

I was asked to answer or speak to the question

During the meeting each male in attendance and whom the elders knew were asked to speak or answer a biblical question.And as their custom was, which I was totally unaware, I was addressed as Mr Clarke from the Strict Baptists would you please speak or answerer the question. This meant that I had to speak about a verse of scripture presented by the elder to the congregation. The verse of scripture was, Philippians 1 [1 v.] “For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;” To which I gave my

answer and exposition of the verse.

I believe my exposition was accepted for after the meeting we were invited to renew our covenant vows and partake of the communion.

Not knowing what this meant I declined, as I knew nothing of renewing covenant vows from the scripture.

Called before the Elders

After the communion meeting I was called by one of the men and told to put my jacket on and come before the Elders as they wish to ask my why I had not partaken of their communion. When I explained my reservation and ignorance of their practices they were pleased to be of further help. We were then invited to lunch at one of the Elders home.

Silence woman these are guests

We had a delightful time and at the head of the table was a senior man in his 80’s along with other visitors. One of the other guests enquired of us about the differences between Strict Baptists and Presbyterians. It came a shock to the lady, who had

asked the question, that we do not baptize infants. She exclaimed, “What? You do not baptize infants?’ At which point the senior man stepped in by saying, “Silence Woman these are guests”. Which I found rather amusing but was not put out by the question and would have freely spoken about it.

Portree Rev Frazer McDonald

That evening we went to the church in Porter where Rev. Frazer McDonald was the minister.

Portree Free Presbyterian Church


Portree Free Presbyterian Church

Church Notice Board


Church notice Board

This minister was a very good preacher and lifted up the Lord Jesus Christ and as their custom was they invited all men to come to Christ and he was very urgent in his exhortation.

I was questioned in the evening, the “free offer”

We were later invited to another home, that evening, along with other guests and at one time I was challenged as to why I did not hold to the free offer of the gospel, as we had heard that night. It

wasn’t the time or place to go into detail but I realized then that there were real differences between the Free Presbyterian Churches of Scotland and the Strict Baptist (Gospel Standard) Churches in Great Britain and differences that were not to be ignored.

A return to the Bierton Church

On our return from Sky I felt is right to return to Bierton and give more support to the cause. This of course meant a move and the realization of finances, as property in Bierton was very expensive. This meant selling my property in Aylesbury, Linslaid and Leister to raise the money.

Angels come to help (or so I thought)

I had bought a terraced house at Canal Side Aylesbury before I got married and I had renovated it. I had borrowed £3000 from Barclays’ bank and was paying this back over a period of 3 years.

My house at Canal Side Terrace in Aylesbury


3 Canal Side Terrace, Aylesbury. My first House

In September 1977 I left Aylesbury and went to Wolverhampton Polytechnic (Formerly Wolverhampton Technical Teacher Training College) to train as a teacher. I rented out three rooms with shared amenities and had kept a room reserved for myself downstairs.

My mother looked after all the bills and collected rent. Whilst I was at Wolverhampton the boy friend of the lady who lived as a tenant asked if he too could rent a room. This seemed OK so I let a room to him. They soon got married and I saw no real

problem. They then asked if they could have just the one double room. I explained that I needed to rent all the rooms but they could have the double room for an appropriate rent. I also said they could use my room down stairs when I wasn’t there.

I thought things were OK but I had a problem three years later (October 1980) when I wanted to sell the house. I knew nothing about the law and the Land Lord and Tenant Act. I soon found a buyer for the house and made an offer to buy a house from Mr Groom at Great lane Bierton who was the son of Mr Groom Senior from Brighton.

The couple that rented rooms from me decided to claim they had right of occupation, which prevented me from selling the house. I went through all kinds of indignant feelings and was angry with them. They knew I had rented the rooms to them on condition if I wanted to return they would have to leave. They called in the Rent Officer and the officials coming in reducing the rent I was charging them. In the end I decided I would have to take them to court to get them to leave.

I had to say to Mr. Groom I could not proceed with

the purchase and he was very upset as it messed all their plans up and cost him extra money because of the housing chain, which had been broken. He even asked me to meet the extra costs he had incurred. He felt I was morally obliged to pay towards the costs (£1000) due to us not being able to proceed with the purchase. I felt upset by this too.

I felt God was on the side of the righteous and if I were to present my case to the court I would get an order to get these people to leave.

I knew nothing about the law and did could not afford a Solicitor so I did it my self. I believed I could do all things through God who strengthened me.

The Judged asked me what the case was all about. I proceeded to read my script but he soon stopped me. He said you cannot do that and without explaining why asked the defendants solicitor to state the case.

Apparently you have to present things in a certain order and way and it must conform to a certain protocol. I knew nothing about protocol or the

law all I knew was I had been wronged and I was looking for Justice.

The judge said I ought to seek legal help. My case was dismissed much to my dismay and my mother stopped up and protested in the courtroom. I got up and left saying no more. Needless to say I was dismayed and dumbfounded. Where was God where was justice. I realized then the law of out land has nothing to do with morality or right and wrong but was pedantic was according to strict rules. This was not justice. I looked to God for help. I had believed God would appear for my help.

What was all that about?

When I returned the next day to Canal Side to sort things out in the house the man, he was a big Irish man, said what was all that about last night? I did not know what he was talking about. I said what do you mean? He said, “ Two men had been around with lumps of wood last night and said they wanted them out”. I was amazed, as I knew nothing about it. I said I didn’t know anything about it and he should go to the police.

I thought that these must be angles sent from God to warn them not to trifle with me. I felt comforted that this was the case. I began to believe it that things were going to be OK.

In the end I had to employ a Barrister to represent me and many months later the couple agreed to buy the house from me at a market rate. It cost me at least £800 in legal fees.

It was a number of years later that my brother confessed to me that he together with another friend of mine had been those Angels.

Prevented from buying a house - I upset Mr Groom

As I have already mentioned we had to pull out of buying his bungalow but he was upset by the fact we did not proceed with the purchase. This was his letter to me, which caused me concern.

17th November 1980 Dear David,

As you can see after you had withdrawn from the

sale of Great Lane we were put in a very difficult position, because as you remember we had been given until the end of December to complete the purchase of this property. This proved to be quite impossible, and although the builders have been very helpful, they had to increase the price to us by


We had not bargained for this when we got our mortgage, and together with extra Solicitors fees that were involved, found us at the end of the sale needing to borrow the extra money. This of course must be paid back in the near future and we felt that, as this was not our fault really, that you might feel you could help us with a £1000 of it. We did give you the preference over the cash buyer we had because we wanted to help friends at Bierton Chapel.

If we could have managed in any other way without writing to you, believe me we would have done so.

Trusting that Irene and the children are well. May God bless you all?

Yours Sincerely, John G

My Reply was as follows:

Dear Mr. G Re: Your letter dated 17th November 1980

I am pleased for you that at last you have moved to your new home but am sorry that the move proved more expensive than you anticipated.

Your request came as a surprise and has caused my conscience much exercise over the morality of the issue; since it would appear you feel Irene and I are obligated to repay some of your losses. However after careful reasoning we do not share the same view and do not accept the obligation. Not only so Irene and I are unable to do so as we are in financial difficulties our selves.

I would like to add that had we felt obliged then by the grace of God we would have offered payment for your loss. This did occur in my last transaction when trying to sell Canal Side. I presumed to give the intended purchaser vacant possession within a

month of the exchange of contract but I was unable to do so since my tenants refused to leave. In this case I felt obliged to him and offered to pay the expenses of my intended purchaser because he had proceeded to purchase on that basis.

When we spoke to you we did not keep you in the dark over our circumstances and did keep you informed, and our arrangements were subject to contract, which at that time had not been drawn up nor signed at the time of our withdrawal.

I do apologize over the matter for it seems God in His providence intervened having His own reasons and although at the present time we cannot see why He may be pleased to show us one day.

Yours with Christian regards, David Clarke.

Dealings like this always leave a bad taste in the mouth but I had to leave it in Gods hands. This shows that Christians are not immune from the normal trials of life and that this chain in buying and selling has a knock on effect. Mr. Groom felt I had let him down so I should compensate him. I

too had been let down by the tenants.

Selling our home in Wigston Magna

We were able to sell our home in Linslaid to a friend of ours Christopher Jacquerie and we were able to do our,r on conveyancing which save us money and time. How ever due to difficulties with selling our house in Ayelsbury we had to move back to Moat Street and live there for a while. How ever this caused problems as I worked in Luton and was a 1 hour 40 minutes drive each way from Wigston Magna to Luton.

A problem of travel and accommodation

Thankfully friends of ours offered me accommodation in luton for 4 night a week and my wife stayed at home in Wigston Magna. This was a short term arraignments and to help with finances we took in a lodger at Moat Street and I worked and stayed in Luton for four days we were seeking to sell our house in Moat Street.

Abstain from all appearances of evil

Shortly after this temporary arrangement two of the Elders for the Little Hill Church came to see

me one weekend expressing their concern about our living arrangements.


Little Hill Church Wigston Magna

The issue causing concern

Little Hill church was were my wife was a member and who had helped with our marriage arrangements and the elders came to express their concern about me being away from home leaving my wife alone with a lodger. They were concerned that this was an appearance of evil and we were commanded to abstain from all appearances of evil. In their opinion it looked bad that my wife should live in the same house alone whilst I was away from home.

Shock and astonishment

Iwasshockedandastonishedattheirinterpretation of scripture because this was just the very kind of judgment that the elders in Jesus time were taken up with. Concerning the Mary Madeline, there religious leaders reasoned if this man were a prophet he would know what kind of women she was and avoid her company. They were judges having evil thoughts.


Now though I felt these men were wrong and felt very resentful about their interference with our domestic living arrangements I decided to travel backwards and forward to Luton to work each day having to risk the danger of an accident on the busy motorway after fining lectured at 9.30 p.m. on two evening a week. This situation drove me to understand what the Apostle was writing about and was to learn later that a misunderstanding of this scripture cause some much mischief among believers as they sought live an outwardly holy life. It was the error of the Pharisee.

1 Thessalonians 5

  1. Quench not the Spirit.

  2. Despise not prophesying.

  3. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good 22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

This relates to prophesying which is speaking fourth the word of God and expounding it. We should not quench the exercise of any spiritual gift but rather prove all things from the rest of scripture, holding fast to that which is good and helpful and to abstain from any thing which appears to be evil and such teaching that leads to error.

I also recalled that the Pastor of the Little Hill church did not appreciate the sermons of J.C. Philipot as he sataed to my wife they would make her ill. We both found this response to the very good ministry of J.C. Philipott alarming and so were we were noy unhappy about returning to Bierton where the doctines of grace were believed.

We buy our home in Bierton

We were finally able to sell our house in Leicester

and Canal Side and buy our favourite home of all 187 Aylesbury Road Bierton. This was a lovely detached bungalow just 200 yards from our Bierton Chapel. It was purchased for £40,000 and we were loaned £3000 by Bertha Ellis in order to complete the purchase on time.


187 Aylesbury Road Bierton

It was here that I stored Michaels Roles Royce which we recovered it for those who had not paid him.

  1. A Gospel Standard cause 1981

    During these times there were several moves, initiated by Mrs Evered, to join the Gospel Standard list of Churches, as she had been our secretary and was finding it difficult to obtain supply preachers. Her sister Mrs Groom and her brother in Law were members of Prestwood Strict and Particular Baptists and really wanted Bierton to become a listed church. I knew some members were quite happy with the ministers that were engaged to speak and did not see the need to become a Gospel Standard listed Church.

    It was during the time we were trying to move back to Bierton that on the 16th January 1981 our church decided to join the Gospel Standard list of Churches. Mr Hope, Pastor of Reading, Strict Baptist Church was the Chairman of the meeting and he agreed to do all the necessary documentation regarding this matter and we were duly listed as a Gospel Standard cause. Mr King had made the proposal and seconded by Mrs Evered and a unanimous decision by ballot was taken. It was agreed we became a Gospel Standard listed cause.

    This was not how ever without opposition from without the Church. Mr Dix, the Pastor of Dunstable Baptist Church, stated to me personally that we were out of order and it was illegal for us to adopt the Gospel Standard Articles of religion and its Rules of Conduct. This I write about in “The Bierton Crisis 1984.

    Ruth Ellis a Church member dies

    At this time Ruth Ellis who had been a great encouragement to my wife and before I married use to visit her regularly and have good fellowship in the lord. She eventfully need looking after and ended her days at the Bethesda Home in Harpendon. I believe it was noted that one could always have choice conversations with her on spiritual matters.

    Mr Collier, Pastor of Linslaid, of comes to our aid

    In earlyApril 1982 Mr Collier from Linslaid came to our Church midweek to our prayer meeting and he spoke on the subject of the Falkland war, this was because England was at war with Argentina in 1982. He informed the Church of the ancient conflict between the Roman Catholic system and

    the Reformation in Europe. Mr Collier was a friend of Dr Ian Paisley and through his connection we were able to here Ian Paisley preach in Mr Greens Church in London. It was always good to here him preach, as he was an excellent preacher even though he differed over certain points of doctrine.

    In connection with Mr Collier it was remarked by his family that, “If he had been disturbed by events in the first twenty-five years of his pastorate he was even more profoundly disturbed by developments since. Blatantly heretical statements from so-called Church leaders, the fresh impetus given to the ecumenical drift by the charismatic movement, the historic visit of the Pope to this country in 1982 - all these things affected him deeply. His response, however, was not to project himself back into the past in a nostalgia for better days. It was to work for the present and for the future. It was to recognize that God is still working today in raising up a witness to the gospel. He found encouragement in his contact with other ministers both within his own denomination and outside; and it is a simple matter of fact that the extent of such contact increased in his latter days.”

    I meet Dr Ian Paisley at Oxford

    At this time there was a memorial rally held in Oxford to remember our Martyrs Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley. And I remember Ian Paisley echoing the words, Fear not we shall light a fire in England that will never be put out”.

    Shortly after the accession of Mary in 1553 a summons was sent to Latimer to appear before the council at Westminster. Though he might have escaped by flight, and though he knew, as he quaintly remarked, “Smithfield already groaned for him,” he at once joyfully obeyed. The pursuant, he said, was “a welcome messenger.” The hardships of his imprisonment, and the long disputations at Oxford, told severely on his health, but he endured all with unbroken cheerfulness.

    On the 16th of October 1555 Hugh Latimer and Ridley were led to the stake at Oxford. Never was man more free than Latimer from the taint of fanaticism or less dominated by “vainglory,” but the motives, which now inspired his courage, not only placed him beyond the influence of fear, but also enabled him to taste in dying an ineffable thrill

    of victorious achievement. Ridley he greeted with the words, “Be of good comfort, master Ridley, and play the man; we shall this day light such a candle by God’s grace in England as (I trust) shall never be put out.”

    He “received the flame as it were embracing it. After he had stroked his face with his hands, and (as it were) bathed them a little in the fire, he soon died (as it appeared) with very little pain or none.”

    Archbishop Cranmer, on the day of his execution, he dramatically withdrew his recantations, to die a heretic to Roman Catholics and a martyr to others. His legacy lives on within the Church of England through the Book of Common Prayer and the Thirty-Nine Articles, an Anglican statement of faith derived from his work. He renounced the recantations that he had written or signed with his own hand since his degradation and as such he stated his hand would be punished by being burnt first.

    He then said, “And as for the pope, I refuse him, as Christ’s enemy, and Antichrist with all his false doctrine”. He was pulled from the pulpit and taken

    to where Latimer and Ridley had been burnt six months before. As the flames drew around him, he fulfilled his promise by placing his right hand into the heart of the fire and his dying words were, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit... I see the heavens open and Jesus standing at the right hand of God.”[97]

    Rescuing Michael’s Roles Royce (About 1982)

    Whilst these things were going on my brother got into serious difficulties. His business was failing and he became very depressed so much so he did not know how to sort some of his problems. He came to me one day explaining he has sold his Roles Royce to a person in Milton Keynes for £7000 and he was still owed £3,500. He was too ill to sort it out. The person kept give one excuse after another as to why he could not pay the money.

    I felt indignant and was not prepared to sit down and see some one-take advantage of my brother because he was ill and could not sort his problems out.

    I said to Michael come on I will go with him and get it sorted. I dressed in my Crombie over coat and suit and looked very official and we went to this

    person’s house in Milton Keynes. I told Michael not to worry I would deal with any problems. When the person answered the door, early on morning, I said who I was what we had come for that I was a Christian and we intended to sort out the issue with the Roles Royce. The bloke looked at me gone out.

    Michael decided he wanted the car back and so it was agreed that he would pay back the £3500 in cash and take the car. I found out that the previous deal had been done between another person as well as this man and the car was in his garage somewhere else. Also a problem with a finance company had arisen. This all seamed straight forward and we left with the intention (or so I thought) to return with the £3500 cash and collect the car that day.

    My brother explained that he understood that these men had raised money through a finance company to buy the car and he only got half the money. I then feared if he gave up the £3500 cash to them he would loose that as well, as the finance company would claim ownership of the car. He had already gone top the police but the police said it was not a problem they could deal with so my brother felt real down about the whole issue. He

    said he could not remember signing any forms with a finance company but I began to feel the case was not a straight, as it first seemed. Michael kept saying he could not remember what had happened.

    I got the impression Michael had been party to some deal and was keeping some thing from me and these men had just tucked him up for £3500 and they now had no money to pay. Michael informed me years later that he did not know about this and these men took him advantage of him, whilst he was ill.

    Michael decided to get the car back so he paid a couple of his heavy friend’s £250 to go and collect the car. Sure enough the next day the Roles Royce was in bed in my garage at Bierton, out of the way. I felt much better even though my brother didn’t. This did not stop my brother worrying because apparently there was more to it than first met the eye there was some problem with the finance company. I felt let down by Michael for not telling me all this. Had he told me all this in the beginning instead of being devious. (Michael now tells me I was wrong) I could have helped him. In the end the finance company contacted Michael and he by then

    realized the car belonged to the finance company. Michael, through not being able to cope with the worry, agreed to return the car as he realized the deal they had done was not straightforward.

    This was all out of my hands and on reflection I think it would have been better to keep the car and give the finance company the £3500 but at the time I was not able to sort the issue out for Michael, because he had kept things from me.

    I felt upset for my brother because he had lost his car and all that money. We are always wise after an event.

  2. A Call to Preach the Gospel

I believe God puts the desire to preach and speak His Word into the hearts of they whom he calls. This desire was placed in my heart the day Jesus called me to hear him and believe in him. My desire to help others turn from the way that leads to hell and to Christ himself for salvation, was acknowledge by Jesus the night I got saved. His reply to me, when I asked what about the others, was all I could do was tell them. What better way than to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ to men.

I had spoken on a number of times at Bierton Church during the weeknight prayer meeting from the table not the pulpit. Gradually however I felt more and more uncomfortable when sitting in the pew just listening to sermons. Particularly when things were not very well expressed and some times serious errors were being spoken. It grieved me to listen to the ignorant talk off the religious whose eyes were blinded to the truth of God and who sought to bind burdens on peoples backs. This issue over the hat and lady visitor was an example. Not that I am against a head covering for a woman but what had happened to this lady visitor was


My wife Irene joins the Church at Bierton

At this time my wife Irene was received into membership of the church upon her confession of faith an acceptance of our Articles of religion as expressing in our trust deed of 1831,

As I have already mentioned not all our visiting ministers were good at preaching and we were not a Gospel Standard cause.

I had also been shocked by the reluctance of the Bierton church to use the chapel to conduct a meeting informing people of the error of the Papal system of Rome, and how we might act righteously in the present day since the Pope was to visit Britain that year.

I saw the Pope on the TV screen, when at Wembley Stadium, and the whole crowd, thousands of them, was singing praise to the Pope. They were singing, “He’s got the Whole world in his hands’. And the Pope received that praise. I saw it and heard it with my own eyes and ears. This man is an Anti Christ. I felt I must speak out other wise the stones would


I did not believe in Bible colleges

When I first became a Christian I did not believe in Bible Colleges. Thinking I do not want men to teach me, I wanted God to teach me. From what little I had seen of vicars and so called trained men I felt Bible Colleges were of no use because these people are not even born again.

Wolverhampton Polytechnic and Teacher Training

So I dismissed the idea of Bible college for me never the less I wanted to learn all about God and speak his word in clarity and truth. This desire turned me to read about the lives of men of God. I went from reading the Beano and Dandy comics and James Bond books to the Bible and then on to the writings of John Bunyan, Dr. John Gill, John Owen and Calvin in a matter of two or three years. It was when I met my wife to be that she encourage train to be a teacher and that is why I attended the Technical Training College in Wolverhampton, to learn how to teach technical subjects.

An Ulterior Motive

My ulterior motive was to learn how to teach the gospel. I took one year out from work and studied at Wolverhampton Polytechnic and finally graduated with a teaching Certificate in Education. This was awarded by Birmingham University in 1978.

Wolverhampton Teacher Training Group


David (bottom center right) at Wolverhampton Polytechnic

I believed that I could learn from secular professional teachers how to teach and then would then be able to take the substance of what God was showing me and then present it to men in a way

they could understand. This was my desire.

I took my first teaching post at Luton College of Higher Education commencing teaching in 1978.

I inform the Church at Bierton of my felt call to preach

It was during this time at Luton College and at Bierton Church that I felt it right to make known my desire to the church as I believe I was being called by God to preach the word of Jesus Christ.

A meeting with Mr Hill and Mr Hope ministers of the Gospel

Mr. Hill of Luton and minister of the Gospel and Mr. Hope of Reading, minister of the Gospel invited me to share with them my calling.

Questioned about the Law of Moses

Mr Hill questioned my belief regarding the Law of Moses and both he and Mr Hope listened. I expressed my understanding of the believers relationship to the Law of Moses and concluded the Law of Moses did not make the Lord Jesus righteous as he was always righteous.. He had an

essential righteouness independent of the Law. He did not have to fulfil the Law to become righteous. He always was righteous. Had he been judged according to the law he would have been declared righteous and so he was.

That imputed righteousness is the righteousness of God, given to all who believe, that Christ’s Righteousness imputed justifies us, without our works according to the Law.

Mr Hill’s Conclusion

Mr Hill concluded that my leading was right and Mr Hope agreed. It was then put to the church that I should preach and exercise any gift I had. This was duly done and a few people came from Albert Street Oxford and Eaton Bray church, to hear me preach the word of God that weeknight meeting at Bierton.

It was agreed without question that I should preach, as the Lord opened up the way, and from that day letters came from different churches asking me to preach at various Strict Baptist Chapels throughout the country. This was my being sent out to preach with the blessing of the church.

The Bierton Pulpit


David preaching at Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church, 5th June 1983

The Papal visit 1982

This year Pope John Paul 11 was due to visit Britain. This was to be the first time in 400 years.

Very few people saw the significance of this and I felt the need to inform people about such an event.

I wrote to the Bierton Church, which meet on the 16th January 1982 (This was 14 years to the day of my conversion) asking if we could invite a member

of The British Council of Protestant Christian Churches, Using the Bierton Chapel to meet and to teach clear biblical principles as to how we could act responsibly and maintain a Godly witness in the present time. I suggested it would be helpful to many churches in the area.

Mrs. E. Expressed the Bierton Chapel was not the place to hold such a meeting but some other place like the village hall. Mr. King said they had Roman Catholic friends and would not wish to offend them!

From this time I began to wonder about the church at Bierton and believed I would see the hand of God out against her.

I remembered, “They that honour me I will honour”.

I held the meeting in my house and invited several people from different churches and Rev Gordon Ferguson came and preached for us.

We eventually was able to by a property in Bierton it was a detached bungalow just down the road from the Bierton Strict Baptist Chapel. I felt

really blessed by God to own it and being so near to our chapel.

Our home in Bierton. 187 Aylesbury Road in Bierton


Just a few minutes walk from our Bierton Chapel 187 Aylesbury Road

Hats or head coverings for ladies

Trouble was on its way in the form of religious oppression. On Sunday morning in 1983 I took to church a friend of mine’s daughter. This was the daughter of Dick Holmes who I use to work with as an aerial rigger. She had been through a divorce

and was having a difficult time. I suggested she came with me to church, as she needed help from God.

She was dressed in tight black slacks and a short top, which showed all her figure. She had long peroxide blond hair and her face was made up. This mode of dress was a striking contrast to the elderly ladies who dressed very modestly with very little make up on and all ware hats to cover their heads in church.

Unfortunately this was too much for Mrs. Evered who came up to me after the service (I call it a meeting because the meetings of the New Testament churches were not called services) and she said to me the next time I bring a female to chapel I should tell her to wear a hat.

Mrs. Evered said that all Gospel Standard Churches insisted women cover their heads and so should we.

I responded that by saying, “ what ever others do that was their concern they were wrong if they enforced the covering of the head upon a none

church member and women visitor having no profession of the Christian faith.”

I said she must raise this issue at our church meeting.

This spirit of legalism naturally took me back. Here was a young woman in sever distress needing the mercy and love of God as revealed in Jesus Christ and all Mrs. Evered seemed to be concerned with was the wearing of a Hat.

I knew the principle of a believing women dressing modestly and being in subjection to her own husband and covering her head in worship. I also knew the principle of the woman not exercising authority over the man or teaching a man but this action of Mrs Evered to use the phrase, “took the biscuit”.

I was a man and was being instructed by a woman, Mrs Evered, to order or insist a visiting unbelieving female wear a hat In order to uphold the principle that it was a shame for a woman to worship God without a head covering.

This covering according to the scripture was to

show the angels she was in subjection to the man and not usurping authority over him.

Mrs. Evered missed the whole point of the gospel and in her religious zeal to maintaining an outward form of religion transgressed the rule she sought to maintain.

This religious spirit was not of God and I believed the gospel needed to be preached to set men free from such darkness. But who would do this?

A Spanking from the pulpit (Isaac deserved it)

I was very conscious of the instruction that I was responsible to God for the discipline of my children and knew the scriptures, which speak of spoiling children through lack of discipline. And the exhortation that if I spare the rod of correction I would spoil the child (Prov. 13. 24). The other scripture, which spoke to me, was that of how a good father ought to “ Rule his house well, his children being obedient and subject to him “. That if I did not know how to rule my own house how should I be able to take care of the church of God (1 Tim 3. 5 - 12. I believed the scripture spoke clearly about corporal punishment and it was a must. (Prov. 29.

15 and Prov. 23. 13).

The first occasion I felt the need to exercise corporal punishment was on Isaac when he was very small. As I write this now I smile and I am sure he would do too. I think he needs corporal punishment now at the age of 20 years old.

Isaac had done some thing, which warranted correction, and I felt this occasion I would use the rod of correction. I was a small thin garden cane, a green one. I made him stand away from me and I said it hurt me more than it would hurt him, to have to correct him like this. He was about 4 years old. I smacked his bottom with the cane and he jumped and couldn’t say a word for a few moments. Then he burst into tears saying, “ daddy that stings”. From that day forward that cane was called the “stinging stick”. That was not the last time the stinging stick was used.

On another occasion I was preaching in Bierton Chapel and Isaac and Esther were sitting with there mum on the back row of the chapel. During the sermon Isaac was playing his mum up and he would not sit still and kept messing about. His behaviour was unacceptable. I was gradually becoming cross

with him until I felt I must do some thing about it.

I stopped speaking and said to the congregation “ excuse me” and climbed down the pulpit steps and went to the back of the chapel. I picked Isaac up and took him out side the chapel and informed him I was displeased with his behaviour and gave his three smacks on the bottom. With this he burst into tears and when he stopped I took him back in the chapel and placed him besides his mum. I then went back into the pulpit and apologized for the interruption and proceeded with the sermon as though nothing had happened.

I heard afterwards the spanking was heard through out the chapel and a couple of the ladies were horrified at what I had done but they said nothing to me. I felt I had done the right thing using the rod of correction to drive foolishness from the child (prove. 22. 15).

Is Corporal punishment what Jesus wants?

Hatred stirs up strife’s but love covereth all sins. (Prov. 10. 12)

Prov. 10 13. A rod is for the back of him that is

void of understanding.

Prov. 13 24. He that spareth the rod hateth his son: he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.

Prov. 19 18. Chasten thy son whilst there is hope spare not for his crying.

Prov. 19 29. Judgments are prepared for scorns and stripes for the back of fools.

Prov. 19 30. The blueness of a wound cleanseth away evil: so do stripes the inward parts of the belly.

Prov. 22. 15 Foolishness is bound up in the heart of the child but the rod of correction will drive it far from him.

Prov. 23. With hold not correction from the child: for If 13 - 14 thou beatest him with the rod he shall not die.

Prov. 29 15. The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.

Answer: Yes.

I preach at various Churches

In a very short period of time I was engaged to preach at the following Strict Baptist Chapels throughout the country:

In fact I was so overwhelmed with being asked to preach at so many places, I could have been preaching three times on a Sunday every week of the year and during the week on weeknight services. This was on top of my full timework, which involved teaching two nights a week at Luton College as well as continuing my studies with the Open University.

The various churches I preached at:

Reading “Hope Chapel” Strict and Particular Baptist GS

Oxford “Hope” Chapel Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Wantage Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Stamford Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Oakington Strict and Particular Baptists

Horsham Strict and Particular

Fenstanton Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Romford Room Strict and Particular Baptists

Matfield Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Eaton Bray Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Walgrave Strict and Particular Baptists

Bradford Strict and Particular Baptists

Reading “Hope Chapel” Strict and Particular Baptist GS

Oxford “Hope” Chapel Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Beeches Road Strict and Particular Baptists

Evington Strict and Particular Baptists GS

Leicester “Zion” Strict and Particular Baptists

Nottinghamsire Strict and Particular Baptists

New Mill Baptists

Winslow Baptists

Black Heath Strict and Particular Baptists

Attleborough Strict and Particular Baptists

Eaton Bray Strict and Particular Baptist Church


Eaton Bray Strict and Particular Baptist Chapel (Gospel Standard)

This church was situated not too fare from our home in Bierton and Mr Jane’s senior was one of our trustees. It was here that questions were raised

regarding the added articles and duty faith and repentance. This cause some concern and I felt lead to speak on the subject of particular redemption and God commanding all men every where to repent, in doing so pointing out that this repentance was legal and not evangelical. The matters of ‘duty faith’ and ‘ duty repentance’. Some of the members had actually opposed my doctrinal stand over this issue. At this church I preached from the text in Acts 17 and defended article 26 of the Gospel Standard articles. I was judged as being wrong, both in the substance and my method of preaching and at a later date gently reproved by Mr Godly, who was a minister in membership of the cause at Eaton Bray. The church at Eaton Bray was a Gospel Standard listed church.

Albert Street Strict Baptist Chapel Oxford


Hope Strict Baptist Church in Albert Street Oxford

The friends from Hope Strict Baptist Church, along with Mr Philip Hope from Reading and David Cook a university students, and folk from Eaton Bray came to the meeting when my preaching gift was exercised and I was accepted as minister sent by the church to preach.

The Strict Baptist Church at Uffington


Uffington Strict Baptist

One of the churches I was engaged to preach at was the Strict Baptist Chapel in Uffington. Where I learned later that this was the chapel that Sir John Betjeman, the British, poet laureate attended in the 1930’s and who wrote his children’s book entitled “Archie and the Strict Baptists”. He also wrote a poem called ”Undenominational”.

I am not certain but I met a young lady from the Peppler family and on one of these occasions and she invited my wife and I to a Christian holiday organized by Mr Peter Fry. It was on this holiday I was introduced to Errol Hulse who was the guest speaker.


New Mill Baptists


New Mill Baptist, near Tring, Hertfordshire Winslow Baptists Tabernacle

Winslow Baptist Tabernacle, Buchinghamshire

Opposition to the Gospel Standard position

Errol Hulse had written a book about the Baptists and he divided them into three groups. The High Calvinist (Gospel Standard Baptists) who he was against, the middle Calvinist (of which he was),

those following the 1689 London confection and the General Baptists who denied particular Baptists.

Grove Chapel Wantage


Grove Strict and Particular Baptists

It became apparent that these men were opposed to the high Calvinist position and were always suggesting that I was wrong to hold such views. This was because we were members of the Bierton Church who had become a Gospel Standard cause and I would seek to defend my position with them. They were in favour of the Free Presbyterian

position with respect to the Free Offer of the gospel but I am not sure of their view of the Presbyterian view of Sabbath keeping as Miss Anne Peppler told me a Joke about the Free Presbyterian beliefs in this respect.

A certain minister Macdonald was engaged to preach but the ferry the night before was stopped due to Ice. So he travelled to preach across the lake on his ice skates.

The elders came to Macdonald, as he was now under censor for an apparent breach of the Sabbath; he had skated on the Sabbath. McDonald in his defence felt he was doing the right thing in his zeal and desire to honour his preaching engagement.

How ever the elders stated they accept that and is commendable for that action but their examination revealed they were concerned over a deeper matter they said skating was acceptable but they wanted to know if he had enjoyed it”. Had he enjoyed it he was guilty of a Sabbath breach.

The Strict Baptist Church at Evington Chapel


Evington Chapel, Leicester

This is where David Oldham was the pastor and also the Pastor of Peterborough Salem Strict Baptist where J.C. Philpot was once its pastor.

David Came to my help when I experienced difficulties later on at the Bierton Church.

Zion Leicester


Zion Leicester New Building

Mr. Grey Hazelrigg who was pastor from 1873 to 1912 founded the Strict Baptist Church at Leicester in 1873. Who was the former pastor of Trinity Chapel, Leicester?

The old chapel was a very large building, in the centre of Leicester, with a small congregation. It was at the old Chapel that I preaching in 1983 and I recall that they still had the old amplifying system with wonderful carbon granule microphones

The Strict Baptist Luton, “Ebenezer” Chapel


Ebenezer Strict Baptist Chapel

This was the chapel where pastor James Hill was the pastor and invited me to preach in 1983.

Pastor James Hill, who was a great help to me wrote and asked me to preach at the church he was pastor of in Luton. This is Ebenezer and now a listed grade 2 building in Hasting Street.

Reading Strict Baptist


Zoar Strict Baptist Reading

Mr P Hope was the minister and our helper at our Bierton Church

Fenstanton Particular Baptist Chapel


Fenstanton, Particular Baptist Chapel, Church Lane, Nr. Huntingdon

I was so concerned to put God first and to fulfil

my calling that when my twins, David and Eleanor were born on 29th October 1983 and were due to come home. I postponed bringing my wife and them home from hospital in order not to cancel a preaching engagement I had made in the fear of God.

Various people this day tell me I was wrong I should have put my wife first. What do you think?

Attleborough Strict and Particular Baptist Church


Jireh Strict Baptist Chapel

It was here I meet David Crowther and had reason to discuss some controversial issues, which

I mention in “The Bierton Crisis”.

Beeches Road Strict and Particular Baptist Church


The Cave of Adulam

The Beeches Road Strict Baptist Chapel began over one hundred fifty years ago at its current location. Known then as CaveAdulam Strict Baptist Chapel, it was a well-known and well-attended Strict Baptist church in the Black Country. The main chapel was officially opened in 1897 and is capable of seating around five hundred adults.

Zoar Particular Baptist Chapel (Independent), Bradford


Darfield Street

Hope Strict Baptist Church Nottingham


The new building

I preach here on one occasion. It was large

building and had its own library and I was kindly give some books which included another set of Dr John Gill’s commentary of the bible. A set of 6 books in red. And as a result I was able to help the father of Stephen Royce, who was a member of the Watford Strict Baptist. He was having difficulties with the Added Articles of the Gospel Standard so I felt he really could use these books. I kept the set given me by Hope Chapel and still have them today and I gave the set of commentaries’, given to me, by Frank L. Gosden to him. I believed this would help, as they had been a great help to me and in due course his son Stephen Royce from Luton.

Matfield Strict and Particular Baptist Church


Matfield Strict Baptist

I preached at the Matfield Strict and Particular Baptist and it was here the matters relating to the use of a television was first raised and brought to my attention in a serious context.

The Papal Visit I write to D.B. an Anglican Vicar

Since the recent visit of the Pope to Britain, in 1982, I was compelled to examine the claims of the papacy and the Roman Catholic Church. During August 1983.

After that time I was very much alert to the activity of the Church of Rome and the trend for the Anglican Church to move closer to Rome. About one year after this time I read an article in a magazine called “Contact”, by Rev D.B. an Anglican Vicar at Walton Street Church of England. I was move to write to him.

Here is the letter:

187 Aylesbury Road Bierton Buckinghamshire Dear Mr. Brewin, 17th August


Having read your article, which appeared in Mays issue of “Contact” (1982), titled Roman Catholicism, I am constrained to write to you as a preliminary step. For you express views concerning Roman Catholicism and Pope John Paul II which are not shared by many Christians. You indicate your views concerning the Pope by stating the John Paul the II are a man of deep spirituality and courage and so worthy of our respect. You say he is a Christian and a Christian Leader although you differ on the authority he and his church lays claim

too. Never the less there are common grounds between Anglicans and Roman Catholic as fellow Christians and belonging to a Christian Church.

You list four basic areas of common ground for this recognition:

A You are (Anglican and Roman Catholic) are both people of Christ.

B Are both people of the bible

C You have the sacraments of baptism and Holy Communion

D Are both people of the Holy Spirit.

You then express the real differences, which you believe ought to be remembered.

Now as a minister of the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ I write to you believing your article and beliefs do endanger the flock of Christ, over which you are and over seer and I would be failing in my responsibility should I remain silent and not approach you.

May I then go through some of the points you


  1. You are both people of Christ.

    The justification for saying this is that both churches call upon the name of Christ and worship Him as saviour and Lord. My question to you is where is the evidence of this? To own him as saviour and Lord is to call upon no other name than his. This being demonstrated by rejecting all others whether lords of lordesses. Is this true of both churches?

    My evidence is the present Pope John Paul II calls upon Mary the Queen of Heaven in prayer. (Quotation from “Return to Poland” Collins)

    Before the Black Madonna of Jasn Gora (where he had many times in the past whispered “totus tuus” i.e.. Completely yours) there he re consecrated Poland to the immaculate heart of Mary as the Queen of the popish kingdom.

    He further told the image “ I consecrate to you the whole Church- every where and to the ends of the earth. I consecrate to you all humanity; all men and women. All the peoples and nations. I

    consecrate to you Europe and all the continents, I consecrate you Rome and Poland (who are) now united through your servant. Mother accept us all! Mother do not abandon us! Mother be our Guide!

    This shows a plain contradiction to you first statement that the Church of Rome calls upon Christ’s name as Lord. How can is be said of him he is a man of God of deep spirituality worthy of our respect and a Christian. A man stooped in idolatry and spiritual darkness.

  2. You are both people of the bible.

    The evidence for this statement is that since the Vatican Council, 20 years ago, the Roman Catholic Church has put great emphasis on bible study for individuals and groups. With a profound effect.

    But which bible do they advance to be the word of God is my question. My evidence is that:

    a) The tradition of the Roman Catholic Church is of equal authority with the bible and theApocryphal books must be considered as scripture. (Council of Trent 1545). Hence the bible which the Catholics are lead to read contains the Apocrypha and the

    reason being they require 11 Maccabees 12 verse 40

    - 45 to teach and maintain their heretical doctrines of prayers for the dead. (The Apocrypha must be accepted as scripture under the penalty of a mortal sin).

    b)Thebibleissubjecttothechurchesinterpretation and the Douay or Confraternity i.e. Those versions, which are tailored to teach Catholic Doctrine, and notes are the version put forward as scripture. Again it is still a mortal sin for a Catholic to read a Protestant version except the R.S.V. (Catholic Edition). Hence the Catholic is not free to read the scripture and interpret it for himself. The Roman Catholic Church under the infallible Pope when reading the bible must rule him. For there can be no other interpretation than what the Church dictate.

  3. Both have the Sacraments

    of Baptism and Holy Communion

    This however is without qualification. My evidence is that the Roman Catholic Church have the Mass and Sacrificing priest, both of which are heretical and opposed to the Holy Communion or Lords Supper.

    As for baptism the Roman Catholic Church maintains the doctrine of baptismal regeneration by which means all past sins are forgiven. Hence baptism is essential to salvation. (See Trent catechism) quote Infants, unless regenerated unto God by the grace of baptism, whether their parents be Christian of infidels are born to eternal misery and perdition). Hence we see the Church of Rome has no Christian Ordinances but the reverse.

  4. Your are both people of the Holy Spirit

Your evidence for this is that the renewal movement has made a good impression upon the Roman Catholic Church with the effect of bringing many Christians together even within the Church of England. Here you place undoubted reliance upon renewal and gathering together imputing this work to the Holy Spirit. Hence concluding the Spirit of God makes no distinction so who are we to put up doctrinal barriers hindering our gathering together with which we please?

Here I would ask the following: If both communions have the same Spirit of truth, light and love for Jesus Christ why are they not lead in

the same way. If the Holy Spirit say, “ Come out of her my people that ye be not partakers of her sins (Rev. 18 verse 4) what spirit is it that keeps them in the Church of Rome or moves the Anglican Community to seek such unity with her. Rome is an Apostate Church.

If the spirit which is in the Roman Catholic Church which leads them to blaspheme the Son of God in the sacrifice of the mass and bow down to idols and seeks the aid of departed saints then what spirit moved Luther and the reformers to obey the truth and leave Rome and the Papal Pontiff and establish true Christian Churches?

What biblical evidence do we have that the Roman Catholic Church is possessed and moved by the Spirit of God.

You also express your personal belief in respect of the Pope being no Anti- Christ but the Church of England and her founders held opposite views. Remember Cranmer, Latimer and Ridley. We should surely keep as close to the bible as these fathers in the faith and defend the little ones of Christ’s fold against all error and preserve them as

a chaste virgin unto Him (2 Cor 11 verse 2)

Now my prayer to God is that Christian men of Aylesbury be united in Christ’s cause and truth having love for the brethren and his dear children in the bonds of true Gospel unity and peace.

May the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be the cause and the communion of the Holy Spirit the means and life of His Church now and forever more?

Yours in Christian concern,

David Clarke. In membership of Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church

  1. I go fishing for Men

    The Bucks Herald Thursday 19th May 1983. Price 8d.


    Bierton Meeting 5th June 1983

    In May 1983 I was engaged to preach at the church

    in Bierton on Sunday 5th June 1983. I have always had that desire to catch men for Jesus Christ but how do you do it. I was now living in Aylesbury and a lot of my former friends are still in and around Aylesbury, having no hope and without God in the world.

    I felt compelled to do some thing to get the message of the love of God in Jesus Christ to them some how. Jesus had done for me and that I was preaching at Bierton Church I decided I should go and ask the Bucks Herald,a local news paper to give me some free advertising. I simple went to the Bucks Herald office and told them my story. I said I wanted to reach all my old friends to tell them what the Lord on, 5th of June that they were all welcome.

    I was prepared to advertise but I know I was being cheeky in asking for it free. Little did I realize it but I was giving them their front-page news for the week. Before I knew it the photographer was out to see me and a reporter taking notes for a story. It all happened so quickly

    The story appeared as follows on the front page

    of the Bucks Herald on Thursday, May 19th 1983.

    Meeting Televised

    Providentially this meeting was televised and can be viewed on Youtube at: Click the blue text.

    David Preaches at Bierton Chapel 5th June 1983

    A news paper report

    I was landed with a problem as I did not expect any of this to happen and I hadn’t informed the church and so I felt the need to explain what had happened in case it offended any one. I felt relieved when no one was upset.

    I felt the need to be very careful because in October 1982 I had already found some opposition from one part of the church and I was not out cause trouble. They were against a certain good minister and visiting preacher because he had used the term Evangelical Repentance and that he read the Evangelical Times. I had defended this man in every way I knew how but for the sake of peace the church decided not to asked this man to preach again. I was very sad and disturbed by this and I

    believed from that time Satan was provoked by my actions. And there was more to come. So for this reason I felt the need to be extra careful.

    The following week I went fishing, looking in the pubs, and visiting people’s homes looking for my former friends in crime, in order to bring them along to hear what Jesus had done for me and could do for them.

    It wasn’t long before the national news network were on to me and wanted the story which I believe appeared in one of the national news papers. I was disappointed in the write up because I felt it was trivializing the reality of what was going on. This is the official transcript:

    Dear David Here’s what we put out on the national Telex service. Looking forward to seeing you at the service June 5th Yours Peter Game

    From Peter Game, OX and Bucks NA Catch: Service Reformed crook David Clarke is hot on the trail of his mates in crime. He’s turned detective to trace thieves, drug pushers, burglars, bandits and drunks in a massive one man round-up aimed at changing their lives.

    And it could result in the most bizarre meeting of shady characters a town has ever known.

    David, 33 wants to pack them all into a tiny church at Bierton, bucks, and tell them how God saved him from spending a life behind bars.

    And if the Local C.I.D. force at nearby Aylesbury, bucks wants to turn up and join in the hymn singing too they are welcome. David a married man with two children from Aylesbury Road, Bierton, is a lay preacher in the Baptist church.

    He said, “God helped me and can help all my old buddies too”.

    David an Electronics lecturer at a Polytechnic explained:

    “ I ‘ve already persuaded some old villainous pals to come along. I want to pack the church with criminals, but it’s going to be a tough job”.

    The former thief and drug user left Borstal aged 18 and decided to lead a life of luxury based on crime.

    “I was in a car ringing business, thieving vehicles and knocking them out again,” he confessed.

    “ I’ve broken into an old peoples home to steal a colour telly, taken garage equipment, nicked from tills, walked of with speed boat engines, and taken drugs. I’ve even sold drugs and got involved in permissive sex.

    “There were time when I used to keep an axe and a mallet in my car just in case. Now it has all changed.

    His life took a drastic change when he “met Jesus Christ” during LSD trip and joined the Baptist Church.

    And when detectives questioned him about an offence he did not commit he confessed to 24 he did carry out.

    He Added “ I’ve had a clean sheet for 13 years. I’m not going to preach the bible at the bad boys --- Just show them how God helped me and let them make up their minds”.


    Memo to news desk: Service on June 5th. We believe this man is absolutely genuine in his actions.

    Memo End.

    Out come of the meeting

    The meeting went ahead as planned but not many people turned up. I heard that some did not come because they did not wish to be associated with each other. Pat Jones and Malcolm Kirkham were now enemies. Pat Jones had not long ago been around Malcolm’s house to blast him with a shotgun. Malcolm had been in evolved in drug pushing and other things.

    Mike West said he wasn’t prepared to sit or be associated with drug pushers and criminal’s etc.

    I had spoken as faithfully as I could of the Lord Jesus Christ and I remember saying from the pulpit how good God had been to me in blessing me with a good Job, a wife, a nice house, children being in church and many friends what more could a natural man want. I had comments made by several people that God had really blessed me providentially and I knew it.

    On reflection it seems from this time I was battered from every way. First my church membership was lost, then my health, which affected my call to preach. Then my children were attacked, then my home was lost, and then my Job is lost. Then my faith in God was lost, which lead to me giving up on my marriage. I write about all these thing in my other book.

    My troubles appear to begin after this meeting

    As I write this it reminds me of the story of Job who was truly blessed by God in his own soul and in material things, then Satan came seeking to destroy his faith in God. God gave Satan leave to do it but the end of Job best better than his beginning. Thanks be to God. I hope my story will reflect the same faithfulness of God to me.

    I meet Stephen Royce and family at Eaton Bray

    Shortly after this time I met Stephen Royce and his family including his father and mother who were members of Watford Strict Baptist Church. Stephen had become a believer and was seeking to resolve difficulties that he had in receiving the wording of

    the added articles of the Gospel Standard.

    He had been brought up at the Watford Strict Baptist Church, where Mr Hill was the pastor but he had moved to Luton Ebenezer and Mr Sayers’s senior was the new pastor and his son Howard Sayers was a minister sent from the Watford church. At that time Howard made it clear he did not accept the added articles of the Gospel Standard that of course was no help to Stephen Royce or his father.

    Stephen writes to me about the Added Articles

    Stephen Royce was had become a Christian and believed he should be baptized but Mr Ramsbottom, the pastor of Luton, would not put forward his request to be baptized to the church as he in conscience could not subscribe in totality to these added articles.

    This became a real problem to him and he wondered why he could not be baptized, as a believer and simply not join the Church, meeting at Bethel chapel. As he could no in conscience agree with the wording of the Added Article because they appeared to deny scripture.

    I fully understood his problem and felt for him so I put pen to paper (or type face) and sought to answer his questions, since I was a member of a Gospel Standard listed Church and sent minister from that Church.

    My reply to Stephen Royce is published in,”The Bierton Crisis” and I believe was a scriptural answer and support to the non-offer of the gospel that we had declared to be the case in the Gospel Standard Articles.

  2. Waddesdon Hill Strict Baptist


    In 1984 a Mr. Rose of Luton, a former trustee of the Waddesdon Hill Strict Baptist Chapel wrote to me whilst I was living at Bierton. Asking if we at Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church would wish to hold evangelistic meetings at theWaddesdon Strict Baptist Chapel during the time when Billy Graham was preaching in England and Mission England was going on. He suggested I wrote to the new Trustees who were now the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptist Churches.

    The Waddesdon Hill chapel was a very quaint chapel out on its own along the village road in Waddesdon. It had closed down due to too few people attending. Each year since 1976 I had attended an anniversary service there conducted by a Mr. Collier, minister of Linslaid Strict Baptist church then Mr. Hill of the Luton Strict Baptist church.

    Waddesdon Hill Gospel Standard Chapel


    Waddesdon Hill Strict Baptist Chapel

    Our church at Bierton would not be interested in Billy Graham or want anything to do with Mission England, so I wrote to the Trustees explaining what had happened and asked if few others and I could use the chapel during this period to preach the gospel. I explained this was Mr. Roses request and I was very willing to be involved. I explained we had a few Christian friends who would wish to be involved including the church at Eaton Bray.

    Association of Metropolitan of Strict Baptists

    A letter to the chairman of the trust

    Dear Mr. Knight 27/4/1984 With reference to our telephone conversation of

    Tuesday I write on behalf of a number of people with a request to hold public meetings for the purpose of preaching the Word of God and worship at the chapel situated at Waddesdon Hill.

    This initial proposal is to hold three of four meetings during the summer months, say the 1st Saturday of each month, June, July, August and September, in the PM.

    I am a Particular Baptist (and minister of the Gospel) in membership of Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church. Whilst our church does not wish to be responsible for such meetings they have no objection to my personal involvement and organization of any such meetings.

    Enclosed is a subscriber list of names offering mutual help and support.

    I understand you are to meet shortly and we

    would be grateful if permission could be granted to our request. If this is possible may we have a copy of the “Articles of Faith” and clauses in the trust deed with your reply?

    Yours Sincerely, David Clarke.

    My request turned down

    My request was turned down, as they wanted a properly formed church to take over the chapel such as the Limes Avenue Strict Baptist Church. I found this way of doing things very chilling and help formed my view of such organized associations. I would not commend them.

    We try to buy the Waddesdon Hill Chapel

    Shortly after this after I had succeeded from the Bierton chapel and a few of us were meeting in our home at Bierton I was informed the Waddesdon Hill Chapel was up for sale. I thought perhaps this was a way forward and we could use the chapel to meet in and we may be in the position to form a church.

    I wrote to the trustee’s explaining my situation. I asked them to forward me a copy of the trust deed as I felt since I had attended the meetings held by the former trustee’s it was quite probable that we would qualify to use the chapel if we fitted the characters of those set out in the trust deed.

    I was invited to meet with the committee and put forward my case and during meeting one of the trustees said they wanted some one dynamic to go into Waddesdon village and make an impact. I thought this was not how I saw things. God was well able to do it his way. I replied it sounded as though he wanted the Lord Jesus to go there.

    I am offered the chapel on unsatisfactory terms

    I was offered the chapel on the basis that I form a church using their confession of faith, which was the 1966 Strict Baptist Confession. I said I could not that because I believed them to be wrong but would be able to do so if they were, as the Gospel Standard Articles, without those added ones. I was turned down.

    I offer to buy the chapel for 1 penny more than

    the highest bidder Not being prepared to let it go, I offered to buy the chapel and since they were going to sell it I would offer one penny more that the highest bidder. They were not prepared to do this. So I left it.

  3. The Holy Table

    About this time, I took my children to church and I had my brother’s daughter with me and she would have been about 5 years old. After the Sunday school before the morning meeting began I happened to place her cardigan on the table at the front of the chapel. This was the table used when conducting church affairs and for the communion. The pulpit was behind this were the preacher stood and preached. The table was where the hymns were announced and given out.

    Mrs. Evered, in her lovely manor, came up to me and said that I was to take the cardigan off, “The Holy Table”. I was shocked by this remark. What was this all about we now had a Holy Table? We were not Roman Catholic or High Anglicans. I was dismayed at such heresy and after the morning meeting I asked the church members to stay behind whilst I established what was going on. I began to realize I was unearthing more religious errors, which would have to be dealt with sooner than later.

    I asked the few members of the church, in front of Mrs. Evered about the “Holy table”. I said

    there was no such thing as a holy table in the New Testament this was religious error and just like the Roman Catholics and their superstitions. I said I would not stand by and let this error go unchecked. To my surprise and disappointed because Miss G Ellis became angry and walked out saying she was feed up with it all. She said she would not want a pair of shoe put on the kitchen table and she walked out in anger. I thought to my self we are in two different worlds what was going on in the minds of the church and congregation at Bierton. I felt so taken up with zeal for the cause of God and truth I could have taken a large axe and cut the table up in front of every one. I decided to do it another way. I would use the “sword of the spirit”.

    The Television radio and cassette recorder

    I was all too well aware of the issues regarding the television set as it was the general consensus of opinion it was wrong to own or view a television. This matter had arisen not only in our church but also anther church that I had visited.

    I had no problem with the television because I did not watch it and after all it could be switch off

    if one had one. I had been a television engineer working for Granada TV Rentals and had visited the Dicker, taking with me, in the company car, my Scotts Presbyterian friend James. This was with the company advertising, on the side of the vehicle, which had caused him embarrassment. I had also taken Mrs Evered, in that very vehicle, all the way to Brighten, to visit her relatives, including Mr Frank Gosden.

    Also I had on many occasions taken our church members to the various anniversary meetings in my company car. All of these churches were Gospel Standard churches. So I was aware of the issues involved. I had discussed the matter with Mr Joseph Rutt, a minister from Bethel Church Luton, who had been very expressive of his opinions against the use and ownership, by church members, of a television set

    I am informed it is wrong for me to teach electronics

    Mrs Evered had express it was wrong for me to teach the subject of electronics at Luton College because it helped students repair television sets. It was therefore a matter I could not ignore but deal

    with in due season. I had discovered far more serious issues that needed to be treated first. I could well imagine the same kind of problems occurring over the Radio, Newspapers and the cassette recorder and future electronic means of communication.

    Escorted out of St. Albans Abbey after a protest

    In October 1983 I was informed that officials of St. Albans Abbey, a Church of England establishment, were for the first time in 400 years giving official recognition to the practice of the Roman Catholic Mass. This was probably as a direct result of the Papal visit to Britain in 1982.

    They had invited a Roman Catholic Father Plourde to serve in the Anglican Church and he was to offer Mass on a regular basis at the St. Albans Abbey. This was in fact illegal and against the principles of the Act of Settlement.

    No one seemed to care or could see what was happening I had studied the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and found it in very serious error.

    I felt constrained to support any kind of protest just

    to let people know what was going on throughout the world. The Mass had no place in the Christian faith.

    I decided to take my two children Isaac John (5) and Esther Jane (4) with me to protest against this evil

    I attended the meeting on a Saturday afternoon and before very long a Mr. Scott Person of the British Council of Protestant Churches stood up and made a formal protest. He was escorted out.

    I waited a while and just before the meeting resumed I stood up and made my protest. I too was escorted out of the meeting with Isaac and Esther in my hands.

    This event hit the headline news again in Aylesbury and also in the local news in Luton these articles appear as follows:

    The Bucks Herald Thursday 19th October 1983


    Teacher’s protest in Abbey The Bucks Herald front page

    A Luton college lecturer was ejected from St.

    Albans Abbey after a stand up argument in the middle of a special service.

    David Clarke was escorted from the building after protesting about involvement of a Roman

    Catholic priest in the proceedings.

    This week 34-year old Mr Clarke, who lecturers in electronics at Luton College of Higher Education, Park Square, told why he challenged the welcoming of Father Robert Plourde to the service.

    He said: To have a Roman Catholic priest appointed as an assistant in an Anglican Church is contrary to the Church of England articles of religion.

    The service had been stopped by a protest from Rev. Scott Pearson, the Baptist minister of Maulden, representing the British Council of Protestant Christian Churches.

    He left the Abbey, but before the ceremony could resume father- of- two Mr Clarke stood up to voice his opinions.

    “I told the congregation the involvement of a Popish person was against Christian principles and offensive. I was escorted out of the Abbey with my two children.

    He said the welcoming of Father Plourde and Methodist minister the Rev Donald Lee on Saturday last week was part of a move to bring the churches together.

    Mr Clarke of Aylesbury Road, Bierton Buckinghamshire, who sometimes preaches in the Luton Area, said he was saved from a life of crime and drug taking through Jesus Christ spoke to him when experiencing a bad LSD Trip.

    I had some opposition and response via The Bucks Herald, our local paper and these are: Thursday 20th October 1983

    An evil wind is blowing

    Sir, - It was a feeling of sick despair, all to often felt in these times, that I read in this weeks issue of your paper the account of David Clarke’s conduct in St Albans Abbey.

    In his position as a preacher at his local church he has maybe raised doubt in the minds of many and laid his own church open to criticism and most unfairly There is and evil wind blowing through the world and the despairing cries of victims caught

    in the midst of sectarian wars. Above their cries are heard louder voices declaiming “We do this for God” and each names God in different tongues.

    Men and women of good faith striving for peace and brotherhood brought about the delicate and vulnerable progress towards unification of the various denominations slowly and arduously. Such a balance could be disturbed and for what purpose? Search the bible that you are so prominently featured holding, Mr. Clarke and there you find that Jesus preached love, compassion and tolerance. Not the condemning of hatred against those of us, of every faith and creed, who are still striving towards further enlightenment.

    Christ’s teachings are simple and clear cut. Are you certain you are following the true leader?

    Mrs. Cecilia Brooks 30 York Place, Aylesbury. NEWS/GAZETTE, October 20, 1983 Teachers


    Another upset person also wrote the following in the same paper:

    Playing “Fantastic tricks”

    Sir, - Like myself, many of your readers must have been filled with dismay to see your recent headlines “Anti - Pope rumpus in Abbey”.

    They must also have regretted that, when the two great Christian leaders, the Pope and theArchbishop of Canterbury, are striving to promote peace and understanding between religious denominations, well- meaning but fanatics should seek to destroy their endeavours.

    Half the cold-blooded murders in Ireland wear the clock of religion as else where in the world, whilst the Russians persecute Baptists and the Mujahedeen. And in Iran the unfortunate Baha’is - men, women and children - are martyred for their faith.

    Do we want the days of the Tudors to come back and flames rekindled at Amersham or Oxford?

    No- one should suppose that tolerance and indifference are one and the same.

    The tolerance, in which I believe, means respect

    to others and for all God’s creation- man and beast and plant.

    It also means love for one’s neighbour but, as Shakespeare wrote; Man proud man, dressed in a little brief authority, plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven as makes the angels weep”.

    K.M.D. Dunbar Firethorn London Road Aston Clinton Buchinghamshire.

    The Lord through Malcolm Kirkham encouraged me. I was move to write my reply to the newspaper and it appeared on the 27th October 1983, which was as follows:

    Cannot Remain Silent

    Sir, - I did not wish to cause hatred, violence or anger when making my protest over a popish person now conducting the mass at the Anglican Church at St. Albans.

    Can it not be seen my actions were of those of a loving and faithful Christian? All Christians believe, “faithful are the wounds of a friend “.

    My protest was based on the fact that the Roman

    Catholic Mass has no place in the Christian Church since it is a blasphemy against the Lord Jesus Christ. (Article 31 Church of England).

    The Roman Catholic Church proclaims a person cannot be saved unless he partakes of the sacrifice of the mass, nor experience the salvation of the Lord Jesus Christ.

    My concern was for those newly seeking the Lord Jesus Christ and to indicate to them the devices of those who should know better.

    I have a wife and family and twins on the way. I have a responsible lecturing post and teach people of all ages. I am experienced in danger and believe I should point out such dangers to the innocent.

    I am currently teaching the gospel to a now reformed drug pusher, criminal and convict. Directing him and his wife unto the Lord Jesus Christ the saviour and not the Mass or any other device of men.

    To Cecilia Brooks and K.M. Dunbar, who believe many were horrified and dismayed, may I say I think not but be consoled with the words of a wise man

    (Acts 5.38) “Refrain from these fears and anxieties for if my actions be merely of myself it will come to naught: but if it be of God, ye cannot over throw it, lest happily, ye be found even to speak evil of the evil wind, that is said to be blowing, when in fact it is the Spirit of God.

    As a preacher of Christ’s love to men, I cannot remain silent but must oppose those kisses, though ever so sweet are deceitful.

    My home is open to all that are genuinely seeking the truth as in the Lord Jesus Christ.

    You may come to see the church at Bierton as well to hear the Word of God spoken.

    David Clarke (Minister of the Gospel) 27/10/8

  4. Truth causes a division

Luke 2. 51

This section deals with those issues that I would not normally publish. However as a result of the very serious doctrinal errors and practice that I encountered I am fully persuaded that it is right to publish them as a warning for others. The following is an account of an issue that resulted in me withdrawing from the communion, over matters of conscience, due to the unresolved churches issues and departure from the truth and misconduct of the church.

The following sermon notes were made before and after I preached at the weeknight meeting, at the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Chapel, on Wednesday the 20th of April 1983. I believe that sermon was the instrument laid at the root of the error, which caused the division, and parting of the ways between the Bierton Church and I. This led to my secession on the 26th of June 1984.

Particular Redemption

I had clearly spoken on the subject of particular

redemption and providentially one sermon was recorder and can be heard via the previous Youtube link to the video ply list. (Click here)

On Wednesday, the 20th of April, I preached a sermon, during our week evening meeting. The text being, this is a faithful saying and these things I will that thou affirm constantly. That they, which have believed in God, might be careful to maintain good works’ (Titus 3 8).

In my attempt to apply the truth of this text, bearing in mind the current needs and position of our church at Bierton, I gave examples, by way of direct application.

I stated how we might be found to take heed to this exhortation if we restored a suitable children’s hymn book which did not contain hymns expressing general redemption & universal redeeming love to all children. Some how a blue children’s hymnbook, published by the Metropolitan Association of Strict Baptists Sunday schools, had been introduced to the Sunday school. I stated also it would be a good work to set our church in order even though some would not credit this to be a good work. That in

this pursuit there may be a thing not acceptable to our natural carnal desires and us as individuals.

The National Association of Strict Baptist Sunday School Hymn Book


The Children’s Hymn Book

The examples given in order

We had no ruling authority and needed a pastor or minister for teaching and ruling well.

We should teach truth in our Sunday school and not error as was being taught by Mr King, such as “universal redeeming love” for all children. I asserted it was wrong to teach the children or lead them to believe in general redemption and that a step to avoid this would be to restore a suitable hymnbook, which was in accordance with our own Confession of Faith..

Effects of this address During this address I observed the countenance of Mr. King who shook his head from Side to side. This was at the point I said it was heresy to teach the children Jesus died for them each one. He said, at another time, he knew not by what spirit I spoke that evening. Mr King was the only other male member of the church and had been sent by the church as a minister to preach. I do not know how long he had been a minister or when he was sent to preach but as such he was responsible for the things he taught.

A Church meeting to resolve the issue

Mrs. Gurney, after the meeting, asked when we could have a church meeting to discuss these matters. Our quarterly meeting was due to be held

that April so we booked the 27th day of April at 2:30 pm. At this meeting Mr. King red from the 23rd Psalm and was our appointed chairman. Mr King was a sent minister of our church and had been then one to propose we become a Gospel Standard cause.

The chairman (Mr King) made introductory comments regarding his position as chairman and that by the next church meeting he would have fulfilled that office for one year and that he wished the church to seek a chairman to succeed him. This was because he could not conduct church affairs whilst there were disagreements amongst the members.

Chairman refuses discussion

to allow the church to discus the issue causing Concern.

The chairman expressed his disapproval of the matter to be discussed since he said this matter could not be raised since, as it was contrary to the rule 15 of the Gospel Standard rule book of which we were governed. He stated Mr. D Clarke was out of order and must have permission of the church to

discuss this matter.

Mr. D Clarke expressed his view, that since it was a case of serious disorder and the Cause of truth would suffer prejudice if left for one month, rule 15 allowed for his action. Also that it would be wrong to leave the church for a whole month with such a charge being unanswered. (P.S. I believed, at the time, this delay was a tactic of Satan and so I the Devil was resisted, in the same way as Cromwell resisted and deposed the ruling king of England, who maintained “the divine right of a king to rule in unrighteousness”.

Mr King asks for an honorable dismissal to leave the church

Mr King asked for an honourable dismissal from membership. How ever I informed him, at the church meeting, he could not be given leave with honour unless he move to other church of the same faith and order, simply because he would not be subject to a lawful enquiry of the church as to the doctrines he was advancing. See our Gospel Standard rules of conduct Rule 15.

Chairman comments upon the sermon

The chairman stated that I had made serious charges against the Bierton church and that he wished ‘ chair ‘ to be respected and honoured by this ruling authority .

Chair opposed

After general matters had been discussed and church business had finished Mr. D. Clarke opposed the Chairman regarding the sermon preached explaining he wished the church to give their opinion as to their belief in respect of teaching the children and their unconverted Parents, at the Sunday school Good Friday meetings. This was because general redemption in opposition to particular redemption was being taught. I said my charge of them teaching heresy was justifiable for Mr. King had said himself, at the Good Friday service both last year and this year, Jesus had died for each one of the children. Also they were teaching the children to sing Jesus had died for them and he loves them all.

The matter was not resolved at that meeting so I gave the chair back to Mr King to conclude the meeting.

The Holy Table (No idolatry here)

After the issue of the hymn book and my defense of particular redemption that matter regarding the Holy Table arose again. I also wrote to Mrs. Evered, inordertodiscussandexplorethematterfurther.This was because this matter was so serious it needed to be put right. Mrs Evered should have known better, after all it was he declared her intention to return the Bierton Church to true Christian practice and preserve the traditions that she had held from a girl as now we were amongst Gospel Standard Baptists. She returned the letter to me unread. She informed me she knew the truth and nothing would change her mind. She inferred that I was young and did not know these things as she had been brought up with the truth. This was blatant idolatry that could not be ignored. This whole matter and my attempts to resolve these serious issues are recorded in detail, along with all the correspondence to all concerned, in my publication, ‘The Bierton Crisis’ published in 1984.

I preach a moving sermon in 1983

On the 26th October 1983 I had the responsibility to lead the prayer meeting on the Wednesday

evening and speak from the scriptures as I felt lead. On this occasion four of the congregation got up and left, my sermon was obviously was a moving sermon.

Essence of the sermon:

The Chapel not the House of God

I explained I had been called by grace 14 years ago and had testified to them of the goodness of God to me. That was in saving me from a life of crime, drug taking etc. I had learned about Jesus through reading the bible. I recalled the facts that I had come to the Bierton church because they too had knowledge of the truth of Jesus Christ, his dying for our sins. His justifying righteousness, and the Sovereignty of God in all his work towards us.

I said I believed God had called me to preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ and I had responsibilities to them all to make known what God had shown me.

I said the building was not the “House of God”. There were no such things as holy tables etc. and we must not reverence these things as was common amongst Roman Catholics.

At this point a member of the church shouted

out. “Well is not this the house of God” pointing to the roof of the building. Then another rose to their feet saying this is just like a church meeting and walked out. Then two other persons, Mr. King and his wife and John Snuggs got up and left.

I was staggered and alarmed for I had not risen my voice, not spoke severely or in a hard way. Never the less the truth as revealed in Jesus Christ had provoked this reaction.

From that time Mr King withdrew from fellowship and no longer attended our meetings.

I then recalled a dream that I had previously and it had now come to pass.

I had previously spoken to Mr Collier about the problems that had arisen at Bierton regarding Mr King teaching general redemption and I had requested our church to invite him to help resolve those issues at our church. However Mr King did not wish him to be involved and the matter never was resolved. Mr Collier stated that we must change the hymnbook, as what we had was wrong.

Mr Collier dies

It was a sad loss for us at Bierton in 1982 when Mr Collier died he had been a great help to me and the church at Bierton. Many people attended his funeral and Paul Watts his grand son and Dr Ian Paisley the minister of the Free Presbyterian Church of Northern Ireland conducted this. Mr Collier had been a good friend and helper to the church at Bierton and he was surely to be missed.

Mr Crane of Lakenheath appointed our Overseer

During this very difficult period Mr Crane responded to our request for help to resolve our difficulties and he did a very good job, and the best he could. However matters were never resolved during the time I remained in membership. We went to several church meetings in order to resolve issues that had arisen but unfortunately they were never resolved. Mean while other issues began to arise that needed to be dealt with.

Mr Steven Royce of Luton requested help Article 26

It was during my first year of preaching that I

met Stephen Royce at the Eaton Bray Chapel at Eddlesbourgh. His parents were members of the Watford Strict and Particular Baptist Church and he was very keen to hear the things of God. At that time he and his wife was attending the Bethel Strict and Particular Baptist Chapel along with his wife and children. It soon became apparent he had believed and trusted in the Lord Jesus for salvation and I encourage him to join the church he was attending. Unfortunately for him he was presented with a problem because he found the wording of the Gospel Standard Added Articles in accurate, at best, and wished to come to terms with their meaning. He reason that because I was a sent minister from a Gospel Standard Church then I would be the ideal person to assist in resolving his dilemma. The particular article was number 26. He was informed that unless he could subscribe to them without hesitation or question then the minister of the Church would not put he forward as a candidate for church membership.

I really understood his difficulties, as I too had to deal with the same issues when our church at Bierton became a Gospel Standard listed Church.

It is a very serious thing to adopt articles of religion that affect our conduct and practice in connection with other people. The way I dealt with the problem has been recorded in The Bierton Crisis under the chapter The Gospel Standard Article of Religion. My experience with the many and varied religious groups and opinions of the day served to ensure that I had an informed mind and conscience regarding Articles of Religion and practical conduct.

Mr Stephen Royce had a valid point and his questioning and concerns were valid. He deserved a good answer, so I did the best I could. See the Bierton Crisis for my answer.

I am asked to help

It was because of Stephens’s difficulty of just accepting these articles, without question he wrote to me and we discussed the whole matter. I in turn wrote my reply and suggestions as to how he could deal with the matter, I understood his problem completely and it was a real matter that needed to be resolved and not brushed away as though it did not matter. It did. My response and answer to Stephen is recorded in my book, The Bierton Crisis.

Stephen found this hindrance, preventing him form being baptized, a real Burden which had been placed upon his shoulders. In order to obey the Lord he requested just baptism rather than full church membership but this was refused without any scriptural reason why not. His response to a question that really was being asked by him was, what doth hinder me from being baptized.

What doth hinder me from being baptized

The answer he received was his inability to agree to something he in conscience says he agreed with out adequate clarification and a definitive clear statement of truth regarding the matter. I trusted that my answer to him was sufficient. You will have to ask him. In the end another minister baptized him and he was not required to become a member of a church.

Paul Rowland a visiting minister singing of Psalms

OneofourvisitingministerswasMrPaulRowland who expressed his objection to the singing of hymns rather than the psalms. Mr Rowland also worked as a buyer for the Trinitarian Bible Society. I had

no problem in the singing of psalms and was very interested in his objections, which were a matter of conscience. He also expressed his objections to the added articles of the Gospel Standard to which by now I was no stranger. As the secretary of the church I was responsible fro engaging our ministers. In order to accommodate Mr Rowland problems regarding the singing of psalms I agreed for him to provide us with psalm books and we sang psalms rather that songs from our Denham’s Collection called the “Saint’s Melodies”.

It was interesting to talk to Paul as he also expressed his belief that the Presbyterian System was more scriptural and of course I had meet some Presbyterians when visiting the Isle of Skye but believed them to be wrong on several issues.

Linslaid and Children’s Hymns

Soon after Mr Collier died we joined their members on their Lords Day afternoon meetings. It was good to meet other believes and I had been invited to join them by Peter Janes. However I was surprised to realize that one of the ladies had chosen a children’s hymn just like Bierton which

taught general redemption and I began to realize things were not as it appeared and began to think was this replicated in other strict Baptist churches and was this just the tip of the ice burg

Meeting Richard Bolt

At this time I met an old acquaintance, a Christian man called Dr. John Verna who too had met Mr John Metcalfe. I had first met him when I first became a Christian, at the age of 20. He was a Doctor working at Stoke Mandeville Hospital working in particular with paraplegic patients. He used to help with the Hospital outreach meetings, which were held every month at the hospital. Several Christians from various churches had joined a group of Christian from the Assemblies of God Church in Aylesbury, to reach patients detained in Hospital. Each month patients were individually invited to the Saturday night gospel meeting held specifically for patients and staff in the Archery unit of the paraplegics department. They would be collected from the various wards in their beds and a different speaker, each month, would give a gospel address and we would pray for them.

Dr.JohnVernaandhiswifehelpedandencouraged and worked with this group of Christians.

I talked with John about my position at Bierton Church and he seemed keen to help and support me. He introduced me to a dear friend of his a Mr. Richard Bolt from a place in Kent near Matfield. John Verna believed Richard Bolt to have an apostolic ministry.

He and Richard Bolt came to my home and we spent quite some time together and I was encouraged by them both to continue to seek God for direction. Richard Bolt was a very straightforward man, direct encouraging and thoughtful. A man of conviction And I believed had the fear of the Lord. I respected him for his honesty and sincerity. It was good to meet him.

I expressed my misgivings about my dealings in the Pentecostal Churches and my new position in the Strict Baptist churches.

Both groups it had occurred to me went to extremes. One held to the belief in the gifts of the supernatural gifts and Baptism in the Holy Ghost

(Spirit) and looked for and expected manifestations of spiritual gifts in believers including the working of miracles (Pentecostal).They were very subjective and looked inward to them selves for the evidence of God working in and through them. Whilst the other group (Strict Baptists) denied the operation of supernatural operation of spiritual gift such as speaking in tongues and gifts of healing etc. But rather looked inwardly to the evidence of Gods dealing with them by how unworthy they might feel to receive any thing from God. That doubts of salvation were a good sign and an evidence of faith rather than presumption. Both group depended on God the Holy Ghost to work and save. I had concluded both groups could go to extremes.

Both Richard Bolt and John were convinced of the supernatural baptism in the Holy Ghost (spirit) and looked for and expected God to operate the nine gifts of the Spirit including the working of miracles according to Mark 16 verse 17. They believed in the fullness of New Testament Christianity and I was keen to learn and hear even though I was cautious and careful.

One thing I observed was that Richard had lost

many of his teeth and I assumed this was because he had believed God for healing and looked to God for divine health. I thought to my self that if Christian were to expect and experience divine healing in this day and age then how come Richard had so few teeth. I did not ask him about his teeth, as I did not know him sufficiently to ask such a direct and personal question.

I meet John Metcalfe of Tyler’s Green Chapel

Whilst speaking to Dr. John Verna he informed me he and his wife had met with John Metcalf of Penn, near High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire and that some of the people there often had a stall on the Market Square in Aylesbury selling Christian literature and the bibles they sold were only the Authorized King James version.

I was interested and because I had recently picked up a small tract written by John Metcalf called “The Gospel of God”, which was about the claims of the Papacy and John Paul the second. I wished to meet John Metcalf because I recalled our visitor to the Bierton Church James who had attended Mr Metcalf’s ministry and I understood

and agree with his writings in the tract. This had been most helpful and encouraging to me.

John Verna and Richard Bolt left and I felt encouraged by our meeting and I decided to go and visit the Church at Penn so as to meet Mr. John Metcalfe.

One Sunday evening I decided to take my daughter Esther, she must have been about 3 or 4 years old and we drove to Penn and found the old chapel called Tyler’s Green Chapel, Bethlehem Meeting Hall. Old-fashioned metal railings enclosed it and the gate was locked with no way in to the front door. It felt strange because the people were inside and a meeting was being held. I though to my self had this door been locked deliberately to give a psychological shock to late comers and the feeling of being locked out as would be the case of the 5 foolish virgins mentioned by Jesus in Matt. 25 verse 2).

It was damp outside and getting dark but I was determined to meet Mr. Metcalf so Esther and I waited outside, in the road, until the meeting had finished. Eventually the meeting ended and

the people filled out sedately and quietly. I took courage and walked up to the man I believed to be John Metcalfe. Not too tall, well dressed, with a cream or white raincoat and white or grey hair. He was very courteous and when I introduced my self and explained my intent. I asked him about the chapel gates being locked for the locked gates and he smiled when I explained my thoughts about the 5 foolish virgins then explained they locked the gate to prevent vandalism during the meetings as they had trouble in the past.

Heinformedhisdaughterandnotedmypersistence in waiting and that I had read his tract on John Paul the II, which seemed to encourage him. He then invited me back to his home for supper.

Esther and I were received graciously and we exchanged much conversation. Mr. Metcalfe’s daughters made a fuss of Esther and gave her chocolate biscuits. I was invited to share my testimony of how I became a Christian and I deliberately decided to tell all that took place the night of my conversion holding nothing back.

(See full account of my conversion written in

Converted on LSD). All was very quite and nothing was said that I remember. I explained my present situation at Bierton Strict Baptist Church and the issues I had encountered regarding Particular Redemption, Law and Gospel, Added articles and finally Holy Tables. I was asked about my work and family and I explained I was a Lecturer at Luton College and a minister of the gospel in membership of a Strict Baptist church.

I felt greatly encouraged and noticed how nicely the house was kept. All in a lovely garden, spacious and it was beautiful. It was old and charming just as a Royal house and John Metcalfe kept an Alsatian as a guard dog.

John Metcalfe was a charming person a man of conviction, decisive and uncompromising. He seemed determined to follow God. I liked him and admired these qualities. I felt I could learn many things from this man. He had dealings with the Rev Ian Paisley but opposed him for unknown reasons. He despised the title Dr. and Dr. John Gill for accepting such titles. Also he had known Dr. Martin Lloyd Jones and eminent Christian ministers but opposed many things.

After that evening I returned another time with my wife and we were invited to attend the meeting at Tyler’s Green Chapel one Sunday morning when Mr. Metcalfe would be preaching. It was arranged that one of the members of the church would look after our four children whist we attended that morning meeting. This we did. This was a remarkable sermon and I had never heard such powerful preaching. I was greatly encouraged and I realized later to substance of his sermon was contained in his publication “ Messiah”. The sermon was eloquent, powerful and I believed very faithful to the word of God. I was greatly encouraged and admired the man and wanted to support his work.

After the meeting I was asked by Mr. Metcalfe how I had got on and he seemed to be looking for feedback. I had become unaccustomed to give any kind of feedback, which could give rise to puff the old man up (rightly or wrongly), so I found this situation awkward. I kept quiet even though I was moved with excitement and wanted to express how well I had got on with the message spoken. It was so encouraged that I wanted to tell all my friends in excitement come and here a man speak the things

of God.

Paul Rowland and I visit John Metcalf

It was shortly after this that Paul Rowland’s, a minister in the Strict Baptist Church, who also worked for the Trinitarian Bible Society, came to preach at Bierton Church. He was a great advocate of the Free Scottish Presbyterian Church system and by conviction would only sing Psalms in Christian meetings. I spoke to Paul about John Metcalfe and invited him to meet him. Mr. Metcalfe seemed interested to meet Paul and I together, so we were invited across to his home at Penn one evening together.

The Shot Gun and our pockets searched

Paul and I went one evening to John Metcalfe’s home and we were received well and our coats taken to be hung up. We were invited to sit in a large lounge rather like a large study and library. It was beautiful decorated and very eloquent. John Metcalfe was dressed in a smart suite and tie.

John Metcalfe spoke about his work and recent publications the Psalms, Spiritual Songs, and

Hymns of the New Testament. Paul Rowland got involved in talk regarding the Presbyterian Church and the Scottish Psalm Book. They soon spoke on doctrinal issues regarding the Law of Moses and legal Righteousness.

Imputation of Righteousness

John Metcalfe maintained that he opposed the views put forward by the Calvinistic Presbyterians who maintained the righteousness of Christ (that which he wrought out by obedience to Law) was our justifying righteousness before God. He said he had a lot of opposition from the Scottish Churches because he maintained the righteousness of Christ is not mentioned once in the New Testament only the Righteousness of God. This righteousness being distinct from Law.

I was not full well aware at the time of the significance to this distinction and at first did not understand the issue. How ever the evening went well and was very stimulating and not without surprise. John Metcalfe posed us with a question as though it was a riddle asking was the fruit thatAdam ate good or bad. It was as though he did not expect

us to answer because he reminded us God had said his work was very good. I knew the answer straight away I did not need to think but thinking there must be some reason behind the question I awaited and Paul answered. This answer was not satisfactory to Mr. Metcalfe and the issue was discussed. I did not answer because shortly after this John Metcalfe reached behind a curtain and brought out a shotgun in a dramatic gesture and preceded to take out the cartridge(s). John Metcalfe was not amused when I laughed in amusement he said he was suspicious of our visit that the IRA had threatened him and had to be very careful. He also had just been informed that our pockets had been searched to check up on us and that tobacco had been found in one of the pockets. Mr. John Metcalfe later used this against the person in derogatory comments.

Our visit to Mr. Metcalfe was one not to be forgotten and was quite Remarkable.

This cause me to consider many things and I tried to understand and unfathomed the discussion regarding Justification. I had at that time been considering the view of eternal justification of Gods elect. I knew of the controversy of Antinomian and

the legalists. I had shared with John Metcalfe a love of the writings of William Huntington and about Martin Luther’s issue of Justification by faith.

It was the misunderstanding of the conversation he and Paul Rowland had regarding Justification that made me consider the issues that I thought they raised and understood the truth to be. These were:


  1. Gods act of Justification, when viewed from the point before the world existed, was from all eternity. In one sense the elect were justified in Christ from all eternity (in the mind of God). However the work and merits of a justifying righteousness was to be performed in time by none other than our Lord Jesus Christ.

  2. He was righteous by virtue of his person and spotless humanity. He did not become righteous by any works of the Law to Moses. He fulfilled the law and walked according to it.

    The gentiles were never under the Law of Moses but rather by it excluded from the benefits that the Jews were promised to those who kept it. The Law

    never promised spiritual blessings only natural ones. All spiritual blessings, such as regeneration, adoption and the gift of faith, came only through the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Also the Law of Moses was not, like the Presbyterians Calvinist’s say given to Adam as a rule to be kept and that eternal life promised to those who kept it. It was not.

    I understood that in the Lord Jesus’s righteousness sinners are clothed and accepted as righteous before God. This being the righteousness of God imputed to all that believe. This being the source and merits of a believer’s justification.

  3. In actual experience how ever, in time, the sentence of Justification takes place upon the person believing God, as Abraham believed God. It is received by faith and takes place in the conscience, when first we believe and receive the Lord Jesus Christ as our saviour. This is justification by faith. (Rom. 5 verse 1). From this springs the joy of salvation, which of course involves the senses of the soul. This experience is justification by faith.

Justification by blood

It could only be brought about by blood and made effectual by blood. Jesus himself being made a vicarious sacrifice. That being by the death of Jesus in the cross. By His death our sins are removed and we be made clean from all our sins. (Rom 5 verse 9). Justification being the declaration by God that we, being clothed in the righteousness of Christ, we are counted righteous for Jesus sake.

This not the issue

I learned later how after this was not the issue with Paul Roland and John Metcalfe.

The follow Saturday morning I had a telephone call from John Metcalfe, I did not realize it was him at first thinking it was Dr. John Verna and I addressed him as John. This did not go down well he said I was being too familiar and I must address him as Mr. Metcalfe. Needless to say I felt awkward and that this man was being unnecessarily rude. We got on to speak about the feedback he wanted and I said I had things to say but would rather wait until I saw him face to face rather that on the telephone. He became very impatient and demanded I say

there and then on the telephone what I had to say. I felt threatened and awkward and was not at ease at all. So I decided I would say about the things I found awkward and unacceptable first explaining that the tract he had written was in fact in error.

His reply was, “look mate I have more theology than I would ever have in 1000 years. That my testimony of what Jesus had done for me was disgusting and that I was in the same danger as the Pharisees, which blasphemed the Holy Ghost during the ministry of Jesus. There the conversation ended.

During all this time my wife had been concerned about me becoming involved with the man as she had notice how much and effect he had on me.

That following week I was away on a week’s study at Durham University as I was a student with the Open University. Here I wrote to Mr. John Metcalfe.

My response to John Metcalfe

Dear Mr. Metcalfe 26th July 1984 Further to our telephone conversation I have

decided against meeting with you when I return from Durham for the following reasons:

You allow not the children of God to do as the apostle exhorts: “ despise not prophesying. Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil” 1 Thes 5 verse 20 - 22.

My words to you on the telephone were that on the one hand I could rejoice with you thanking God for “ here was a man I respected and trust in the things of God (for various reasons) whilst on the other hand I got cross with you and could take extreme dislike to you for what appeared to be a sinister way, This I took exception too.

Now you did not inquire as to what I meant but rather justified all your ways, methods and actions by stating your beliefs, saying that for the first time I had come under the preaching of the word of God in the unction of the Holy Ghost. That as the opponents of Christ questioned the spirit by which the Lord Jesus performed his mighty works, so too I come very close to their fearful condition.

Your then stated your beliefs in respect of my

own testimony; either you rejected what I said as true or was in doubt as to its reality and substance (correct me if I am wrong).

I am sorry if I offended you and your family when I gave my testimony, please forgive me. How ever I am not the only believer to speak of vile things. Deut 28 verses 53. Lam 2 verse 26 and Hos 1 verse 2 and many more. Do you impute guilt to these also as you do me? Never the less what I spoke was true and an actual account and not as you seem to imply an opportunity to speak of self. For that true account I offer no apology.

If you reject what I said as truth I protest I am no liar. And if you are in doubts as to the reality well I cannot add to or diminish what the Lord Jesus works or works not. You are entitled to your opinion but pray give me the same liberty to judge you, your preaching, writings and assertions.

I still do not understand your impatience with me questioning you regarding the statement in the tract, “The Gospel of God”.

You say the issue at the Reformation was: Given

the merits of Christ person, how are they imputed and his person imparted. Page 33. I said to you. I could understand the statement of “ the merits of Christ’s person being imputed but not his person imparted.

I gave you room to explain, owned an ignorance and awaited further light and even said I would reconsider the statement. Here however you said you knew more theology than I ever would in 1000 years, given it were possible I should be granted such time; called me mate and kept me at a formal distance.

Well be that as it may I still await a theological precise statement, whether it be in realms of high and heavenly things or in terrestrial ones.

I say persons are communed with and not, with natures, imparted. Neither persons nor natures imputed. I would suggest your tract should read: Given the merits of Christ’s person, how are these imputed and His nature imparted. I say I was not seeking to find faults; it stuck out like a sore thumb, just as my incorrect spelling may do.

Here again I beg your pardon and apologize for any seeming impertinence. I say to you this behaviour of yours displays no humility, of which you say is lacking in me. Also according to your judgment I am not low enough yet before God. You judge by appearances; so do I but are you right? Only God knows the agonies, the heart searching and tears shed since our conversation and that is no pretence.

On these points I have mentioned I beg your reply and answers. For how can two walk together if these differences divide? I certainly have no intention of being your enemy.

You said at one stage you wondered if I be teachable. Well I am allowing my feelings to act in judgment over these issues. This I do as you set the example and encourage, or have I got this wrong as well?

I get excited for you, over the production of the Psalms and hymnbook and would like to have seen them in use. I hope my letter to you now will not cause that breach to prevent it.

I have read your tract 2 and have found both 1 and 2 very relevant, pertinent and well written. They search me. Particularly tract 2 and I find I have walked the path of your tract. May they be blessed of God for the furtherance of the Gospel and the purpose for which they were written?

I could comment on the tract 3 about Taylor Brethren but not unless you wish

Yours very Sincerely. David Clarke.

Following this letter in hot pursuit I wrote the next letter this would have arrived the next day.

Dear Mr. Metcalfe,

I also think it wrong to speak of the merits of the person of Christ.

The merits of Christ yes! But not the merits of his person. The reason for this is:

As the Son of God he is a divine person. By nature He is God. Essentially God by nature but personally the Son of the Father. To speak then of the merits of a divine person is abhorrent to the

delicate and gracious soul for one cannot admit any imperfections in God nor demerit as to perfection’s, councils, actions or purposes. God is by definition essentially righteous. Perfectly just and right in all and in everything. Whether this glory be revealed or veiled always was and ever shall be.

The scripture speaks of the Lord Jesus Christ being the express image of the Fathers person.

I admit a complexity; in that the Lord Jesus Christ is bi natural, that is to say he has two natures. Yet he is but one person, co.-equal with the Father and Holy Ghost. By nature eternally God taking in to into union with himself, at the incarnation, our humanity, that which he was not, becoming truly man. There is now then a union of divine and human natures (never to be dissolved) hence Christ Jesus the Lord is a glorious complex person.

We may speak of the merits of Christ Jesus for he is truly a human being, having a real soul created when made man; this man may accrue merit by virtue of living in this world being not only made under the Law of Moses but under every divine rule, him being subject unto his God and Father.

The divine servant.

The expression then, “how can the merits of Christ’s person be imputed?” I say is too loose and really the whole quotation should read: given the merits of the Lord Jesus Christ how are they imputed and His nature imparted? This being the question at the Reformation.

If you think I am being nit picking then what kind of 1000-year theological course do you advocate as being worthwhile.

I write this way because I trust it will be of help to you. You certainly have helped me in causing me to consider many things. I also add I stand to be corrected and ask you to do so.

I expect I have touched on you doctrine of justification and perhaps you have deliberately phrased you statement in the tract the way you have because they reflect your views of justification. Am I right?

Please excuse this hurried note but I must write, as I am able. Yours Sincerely

David Clarke

Durham. 25th July 1984. My two letters were returned with no comments.

I took it that was meant to express he rejected my observations or council, against himself.

10 I leave the Bierton Church

The events, which had taken place in our Bierton Church, had convinced me Satan’s kingdom was being plundered. I had been instrumental in causing no small stir in the church. By October 1983 of that year the church was dysfunctional.

I had been engaged to preach and conduct the communion service but felt unable to do so because in conscience it wrong for me to do so. This was because the communion represented the common fellowship we all had in Christ but our fellowship due to these severe difficulties divided our church. I believed until the issues were sorted out and the church was in order and of one mind, in the Lord, it would be wrong for me to conduct the communion service.

Mrs. Evered, the person who had objected to the term’s evangelical repentance, of course had pointed the finger at me. The incident regarding evangelical repentance was another serious issue, which I deal with in “The Bierton Crisis”. It was said I caused these difficulties since April 1983 as I had written to Mr. King, a member of our church,

and a sent preacher from the church. Mr. King had been advancing views of general redemption, which I objected too and opposed him.

Our articles of Faith clearly stated a belief in particular redemption and also Mr king and Mrs Evered had been the ones to propose and second we join the Gospel Standard. So they had no excuse for ignorance. I had attempted to correct these errors by speaking to Mr. King personally and finally ended up writing to him and also to Mrs Evered so as to make it quite clear what I was saying and found unacceptable. This letter was said by Mr. King to be, “Full of condemnation” and Mr. King had read parts of that letter to the church before he resigned. This letter is recorded in “The Bierton Crisis” and Mrs Evered had returned my letter to her unread.

Not only this but the issue of Ladies wearing hats- I say head covering- had surfaced (not that I was against women wearing a head covering as the scripture taught this) but rather against this insistence of ensuring visiting unbelievers wearing them. Then there was the issue of “The Holy Table” all of which were heretical views and introduce by Mrs Evered, the church member who had insisted

she knew best, and had known the truth since a girl.

Jesus the sum and substance of the Sabbath

Then finally the issue of Law and Gospel surfaced. It was now being maintained by Mrs Evered that the Sabbath Day (the Mosaic Sabbath) was to be kept by every one. Where the scripture teaches that the Lord Jesus Christ is the sum and substance of the Sabbath. He is the rest for the people of God and we must enter into this rest (the true Sabbath) not the Sabbath day according to the Law. I asserted every day was the Sabbath. It seemed to get worse See.

  1. J C Philpot’s sermon on the Law and The Gospel

  2. Also an article By Philip Mauro The Gentile Believer and The Law of Moses.

  3. Gilbert Beebe’s article on the Christian Sabbath, in the appendix.

I actually felt the old serpent there and I was about to stamp on the Old Serpent. Looking back I

realize I had been contending not against flesh and blood but against those principalities and powers, which had kept many believers in bondage and chains.

I felt in the end it was me that was causing the trouble at the church and I should leave things alone. I now believe, on reflection that was a satanic suggestion. I had been standing for the truths of the Lord Jesus Christ but had met with all kinds of false religious spirits all of which, I was naming and opposing.

I secede from the Bierton Church

From that meeting at the Bierton Church in April 27th 1983 until the 26th June 1984 when I seceded from the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church.

I contended for the truth of the gospel of Christ our with our church members, in particular with Mr King and Mrs Evered, regarding these very serious errors in belief and practice.

The whole of the matter I wrote about and published my article to all our Trustees and all

persons connected with the controversy. This Publication was privately published in 1984 and circulated personally by me to all concerned and entitled “The Bierton Crisis”.

This ended in me seceding from the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church on 26th June 1984. I did this because I saw no hope if people wished to remain in darkness. I could not act in faith by staying in a situation I believe I should withdraw from. According to our rule the church could have dishonourably dismissed me and my wife for the none attendance of the church communion, from membership but as no doubt advised by Mr Paul Crane our elected over seer, they had no real grounds. Neither my wife, Mr king, or me were dishonourably dismissed from membership.

I inform all our trustees of my actions

I felt is my responsibility to inform our trustees of the whole matter and this record, and report, is contained in The Bierton Crisis.

I Preach at Home

Having left the Bierton church I found it very

difficult to adjust to our new situation. I considered going to another church but where was the question. In the mean while we met at home and I preached to my family and friends on Sunday mornings. I felt I had been under siege and my home was now my refuge. I was now preaching in the same room that Gordon Ferguson had preached during 1982.

I did however believe we should be in a local church but where could we join. I was very aware of the failing in the Gospel Standard way of things as they were at Bierton. Bierton church had in fact fallen from the way of grace of God. Even though their words were full of the language. Their Articles of Faith were clear that the Gospel is the rule of life for the believer but in practice the Law of Moses and their own tradition had become law. Also the position of their added articles was very shaky and I found them inappropriate to adopt as a confession of faith. We found ourselves unchurched and I believed we should do something about it.

I have written about this in my article “The Bierton Crisis”. See appendix.

I sought God in prayer and felt we should be

prepared to move house and job in order to be in a church where God wanted us to be.

I experience anxiety

After the conflict at Bierton and my seeking to know the mind of God and seeking His direction I began to feel very weak and fearful. I began to fear going out to preach. I soon was unable to face going out to fulfil those preaching engagements. I did not feel it right to go preaching and get other churches unnecessarily involved in judging the issues that I had with the church at Bierton. There appeared to be just too much to deal with. I became fearful and it crippled or disabled. I felt like I was having a breakdown of some kind. I just did not know how to cope. I was not managing and I needed help. The conflict with John Metcalfe made me very cautious.

A very serious issue occurs

At this time a very serious matter occurred, which affected my whole family and others and required the involvement of the police. I now realize that had we been in a functioning church the matter could have been dealt with. A Strict Communion

church order would have been a safeguard and a help to resolves such an issue. I am prepared to share this matter with any one on private basis if it will help as it is very serious and such matters cannot be ignored.

I learn the sense of Strict Communion

It was this event that led me to see the sense of strict communion as the church had the power to deal with such an issue when the law of the land failed.

I Seek a City whose builder and maker is God

I felt compelled to write, The Bierton Crisis” and circulated it to all who were effected as I believed not only had I been called to preach but was also set for a defence and confirmation of the Gospel. I was to learn again that those things that had happened to me were to turn our for the furtherance of the Gospel. Phil 1 verse 12 But I would ye should understand, brethren, that the things which happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the gospel;

David Oldham Pastor of Evington offers help

After the publication of, ‘The Bierton Crisis”, Mr David Oldham, pastor of Stamford and Evington Strict and Particular Baptist Churches invited me to spent the day with him at Leicester and we were able to talk through some of the issues that I had written about. I was very thankful for this help, as I felt so alone.

  1. I seek a City

    whose builder and maker is God (Heb. 11 v 10)

    Leprosy Discovered

    (An extract form The Bierton Crisis)

    In chapter 13 of the Bierton Crisis I relate how the communion of the church was restored but this led onto another more serious problem, which needed to be resolved. That being the distinction between the Law of Moses being a rule of life for the believer and the gospel. Sadly to say the truth of this matter lies under much debris at the Bierton Church today, but I believe will surely shine when God fulfills His word as spoken in Act 15:16.

    Restoration of the communion at Bierton

    After our church meeting in February my consciencegavemeleavetoconductthecommunion service with the Bierton church that following March. I preached from the text Acts 15:16 during that day: ‘After this will I return and build again the tabernacle of David which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up:’

    Mrs Evered was not present at those meetings

    but we partook of the communion that evening with myself presiding.

    Leprosy cannot be cured

    At the next church meeting it was evident to me that the deeper one probed to discover the nature of a disorder the worse things became. I say the disease became apparent to all who have eyes to see, and I will say unto them that give a glib answer to the question as to whether the law of Moses be our rule of life or the gospel: I say remain silent and only speak of those things you know from experience and according to the oracles of God. For this I say is the root of the matter; Mrs Evered has Moses as her rule while I had the rule of the Lord Jesus. That is to say His gospel. The church meeting of 21st April revealed the disease. Let the reader read the following quotation from The Bierton Crisis.

    Church meeting 12th June 1984

    The following is a full account of the address given the evening of my secession and was delivered on Wednesday the 12th of June 1984 at 8: 15pm

    Commencing prayer

    Our Dear Lord God thou hast promised to hear when thy people call upon thee; and we do call in Jesus’ name. Please come to our aid for his sake we ask.


    The address

    What I have to say tonight is very important, since the reaction, which must take place, will have far reaching effects. It is so important to you all that I am constrained to record (cassette) what lays heavily upon my mind, for the benefit of all concerned and may afterwards be used and freely available by any who are concerned to maintain the cause of truth here at Bierton or elsewhere.

    You may find what I say will move you to say, we have had enough. We do not understand the bible the way you do. We believe you are wrong and cannot walk with you any longer and it would be best if you depart and trouble us no more. If that were your hearts response I charge you before God and the elect angels to accept my resignation as

    already given for me leave to do what I must.

    Whatever other response we get my prayer and hope is that it will turn out for the good of all concerned and the cause of the Lord Jesus Christ. I am certain of this that where God is at work the enemies of truth will speak evil of all the good which I hope will come as a result of these proceedings.

    I apologize for the unorthodox way, or un- traditional or unetiquette manner I may have, but realize this: the Lord God is not bound or tied to work by the rules and traditions or etiquette of man. I act as I do for we are at a crisis point. Satan has wrought provoke trouble and made the people of God ill at ease. It cannot go on. We must not let it go on. Enough is enough.

    Dire straits require dire measures for correction. Epidemic sickness, epidemic measures for rectification. Times of war are not as times of peace. Cheeseparing manors have no place in the battlefield, so I beg the pardon of any who judge me out of order.

    I have spoken to Mr Crane and informed him

    of my recent announcement of Wednesday last, to resign from both the office of secretary and membership. He made a special visit to discuss with me my points of discord and reasons for my actions but we were unable to conclude or settle the matters that I raised. Mr. Crane left with a note of caution to not act in haste, to maintain sound doctrine.

    Now since my announcement to you and in much prayer, I am persuaded I must put forward to you all the actions we must take, as a people professing godliness, given the constraints we all have and are faced with. By constrains I mean the following:

    Our relative ages and abilities. Our current membership and geographic locations; of us all including Mr Crane. Our constitution set out in the trust deed and relationship with the Gospel Standard group of Strict Baptists.

    Now I say way forward and actions for things cannot remain as they are.

    A remedy must be sought and that remedy which will do us good must come from the Lord, whom

    I trust we seek. Therefore we must appeal to the God of heaven, seek directions from the word of the Lord and put in action the principles taught us in the word. This must be the way and is only way.

    Let me remind you of my announcement and reasons for action in May/ June of this year. I said then, I have two immediate matters of importance that effect the church at Bierton which must be dealt with:

    Resignation from office

    My resignation from office as secretary My resignation from membership

    This being important and must be dealt with immediatelyforthismonthmustbespentinengaging ministers for 1985. It being common practice for ministers to give their dates for preaching after the end of this month for the period January to December 1985. This is of prime importance for the remaining members.

    Resignation from office This being a mere formality but having repercussions must be treated as soon as possible.

    Resignation from membership

    It has been necessary for me to examine my reasons for faith and religious practice and find my ever-increasing compromise inconsistent with those possessed of a true faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and the fear of God. This rendering my activities of preaching and teaching in the church at Bierton and elsewhere ineffectual having not the approbation of God though I have spoken truth in the fear of God in and amongst you, by me remaining silent and holding my peace for the sake of peace and unity, afterwards this has removed any base and ground for my faith towards God in this matter and hence I can no longer exercise faith expecting God to appear by the way of building again that which is fallen down, here at Bierton.

    Areas of Compromise (Secretaries responsibilities)

    As secretary I have to engage only those ministers which church wish to engage. The church wish to engage. The church consisting effectively only of women. In this matter then the women exercise authority and power over the man, which the

    scripture forbids.

    The rejection of some ministers by the women on unscriptural grounds Ministers have on several occasions, by the will, wish and desire of the women: and in my view to the detriment, harm and hurt of the cause of truth. The rejection of these men being based upon the maxim that peace must be kept at all cost, even at the expense of truth and righteousness. In this practice I will no longer continue. For example, Mr. C Lawrence, minister at Harold. Mr. S. Scott – Pearson, minister at Maulden. Mr. Redhead, Mr. Payne and a Mr. Butler (of Chelmsford), were all rejected by the women voting.

    A women pastor at Winslow

    This matter came to a head after my visit to the chapel at Winslow where I was engaged to preach. I was shocked and surprise to find they had a women pastor and I was lead to believe they were to hold a united service that evening with the Anglican and Roman Catholic churches.

    After preaching in the morning the need to earnestly contend for the faith and for the scripture

    to be our only rule of faith and practice I felt constrained to write to the Deacon, Mr. Paul Duffet, and express my shock in respect of a women having such authority and the so called united service with the Roman Catholic church, thus making no distinction between the false church of Rome and the church of Christ. At this my conscience accused me in this way: but look at you at Bierton, the women are they that rule. How can you write to a man and justly point out the error and un- biblical practice of the Winslow Baptist church when you at Bierton are equally guilty of the same charges. Hence I was powerless to act, as I should do. Example 2:

    Contention Children’s Hymn Book

    Contention for truth: My recent contention with the church regarding the singing Hymns by the children, is judged by the women as not an important point of concern. Yea rather, we know better. I maintain children must not be taught that Jesus died for them each one. (Hymn 169). In this matter the church or women disagree and so the women have their say.

    Example 3:

    The reverence of the building Reverence of table and the fear of man

    Ihaveplainlytaughtandopenlyrejectedthenotion that the chapel is a Holy Place, to be reverenced and that the table is not in any way to be reverenced. Both matters caused contention. My belief being that unless these heresies are stamped out the Lord will not appear to repair the ruins at Bierton. Hence I cannot exercise faith nor hope in God to bless is as a people in church while such notions go unchecked. On a number of occasions I have listened and heard our ministers refer to the House of God etc., Terms very loosely used. In each case I believe the ministers aught to be acquainted with the views of Mrs. Evered for they would then be very careful not to use such loose expressions and rightly refer to the church of Christ as the house of God and not the building. Act 7 verses 49. Hence I cannot expect nor exercise faith in God to appear for us unless these affairs are set in order.

    Call of Abraham

    I must obey God rather than man. I do not know

    what lies ahead for my family, and me but I must teach my friends and family the ways of the Lord Jesus Christ. To do so I must not remain in a compromised stifled position, for every man must give an account unto God and we must each act and walk according to the measure of faith given. I have a family to bring up and I must do free from false religion.

    Whilst I am bound and tied by my membership here and the church pulls one way and that being the opposite way to the way I must walk, I am not free to walk by faith nor am I true to the “ Faith “. Hence truth would cease to be a governing principle in my life.

    My experience having lead me to the belief that the structure and government of the Bierton Church (like many churches) inhibits truth: that truth is not able to flourish once the primary purpose of our activity is to protect our own authority, power and the Status Quo. Truth becomes subservient to this end and so ceases to be truth and exist in its own right and so cease to be true. Truth cannot then be said to have set us free in this case.


    At this point in the meeting. I went on to give my recommendation, but I would like to stop here and explain my last concluding statement relating to truth. This I did mention to Mr. Crane but not to you at that meeting.

    Cessation of truth

    By this I mean truth is not a prime concern only in so far that it keeps or preserves the traditions and order, which you have become used to. Whether that order or way of life be according to the word of God or not.

    For example:

    A false view of a gospel church

    If I speak of a Strict Baptist or the denomination in general say the Gospel Standard churches, I think a picture that may present itself to many like you may be as follows:

    A A particular stile of chapel building. The forms of worship were an opening hymn is sung followed by a reading from the scripture and prayer (20

    minutes) then notices. A second hymn followed by preaching. A final hymn closing with a benediction (1 hours)

    B All ladies being expected to cover their heads in worship.

    C The preacher engaged to preach often having come a long distance and in membership of a similar Strict Baptist cause. His ministry being acceptable provided: He is suitably dressed (generally a dark suit and tie). His speech is that familiar to the people,

    i.e. Uses phrases like free grace and denies free will and has a standard range of terms for speech. This being whether he be intelligible or nor provided what is said does not disturb the people and gives assurance that all is well, if not God will appear for them if they continue just as they are. If this were the case he will generally be asked to preach again the next year, and so the cause goes on.

    D The general picture one may gather is that to read the Gospel Standard and to support the other chapels at their anniversaries and follow the general trend of the majority of the chapel people, and then this is being faithful to the cause of Christ.

    E Because this is the common and hence normal conduct of the majority of people one might be lead and expected to think that this is the way spoken of in the scripture. That such order in the church is the way of life we should preserve and contend for. That any deviation from this is to fall away and become wide of the mark and so fallen from truth. Hence the people gear themselves up to serve this way of life. To promote it. It becomes the habitual norm, a way we expect our children to follow. That the grace of God tempers us to serve this way for after all it is the way, the truth and the life.

    Now when this happens I say the people, like Samson have had their eyes gouged out, and are made to tread the mill.

    The evidence to support my charge

    The evidence I have to support my assertions that truth ceases to be truth for such a people is as follows:

    When I charged the church at Bierton, which is a Strict and Particular Baptist, Gospel Standard cause with teaching general redemption or suffering it to be taught by means of the hymns or otherwise,

    the church were offended and not at all repentant. It appears to me the general consensus of opinion is what can be wrong in using the phrases, when speaking to the children, the Lord Jesus has died for them each one and the Lord Jesus loves them all.

    It is also argued because the scripture uses the phrases all the world etc. Then we cannot be wrong in this matter of using hymns expressing redemption for all, even though we know it cannot mean all.

    I say here truth does not govern the people but rather an unguarded sentiment for the children and a pattern, which has been adopted over period of years. If the people cannot see the error here then they have no eyes to see in this matter.

    The same may be said over the affair of the Holy Table and the chapel building. I maintain truth has not been the guiding principle in the minds of the people but rather a carnal view and long-term acceptance of untrue sentiments relating to a place of worship and the church of Christ. That some of our ministers are responsible for using loose

    phrases of speech in this matter and Satan has used this to seduce people. My question is this: Do the people love the chapel more than the truth? I know it brings back memories etc. But will we forsake it for truth? If not seduction has taken place and so truth ceases to be a prime mover in our lives. Just as the church of Rome relies upon its historic background also tradition and structure and has come to view the primary purposes for its existence is to extend its territory, preserve its identity and use all means to maintain its cause believing it peruses a God honouring and God blessed end. Seeks to resolve difficulties by compromising truth for peace sake, such a church has left the foundation upon which the church of Christ is built. The end thereof is death.

    How then can I be at peace or rest where this takes place? I seek a city whose builder and maker is God, not a chapel or people that will not forsake all for Christ yea even the chapel, family and life long friends. I think in the whole affair we are learning the truth, by experience, of what the Lord Jesus said he came not to bring peace to the earth but a sword, that they that shall be our enemies

    shall be they of our own households


    I concluded by giving a recommendation that Gwen should act as secretary and by no means Mrs Evered. I commended you to God and the word of his grace, which is able to build you up and give you an inheritance among them that are sanctified.

    I further explained, that I would write to the churches where I was engaged to preach to avoid them embarrassment for they could not have me preach being out of membership with you or any one.

    Having left the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church I was full well aware of the New Testament order of Christian life. Scripture taught we should not forsake the assembling of ourselves together (Heb. 10 verse 25). But rather be in fellowship with other believers. I sought therefore God in prayer and looked out for direction from the Lord as to where and what I should do.

    I had concluded that my withdrawal from the communion of the Bierton Church was the

    honourable thing to do. It became clear the church was not infallible. And neither was I. However we have to walk by faith with a good conscience before God. It was wrong to go through the motions of partaking in the Lords Supper, which symbolized the unity of the church by the one bread and one cup and all being of one mind, when in fact we were not in spiritual union or fellowship together.

    I had stood for the truths and tenets of our Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Articles of Religion and our stand as a Gospel Standard listed cause just confirmed our position but amongst our members was the practice of heresy and religious adultery with no insight as to how to put right or deal with matters which were out of order.

    The case was very clear the Lord Jesus Christ had died for the elect only. This is Particular Redemption. On that basis there was no room to teach general redemption or teach any mixed groups of people, let alone children, that God loved them all. The scripture is clear Jacob have I loved Esau have I hated. All the problems associated with the Added Articles of the Gospel Standard articles could be resolved with right understanding of

    Particular Redemption- why make it complicated as it appeared to have happened in the case of Stephen Royce.

    Mrs Evered had displayed her allegiance to the Law of Moses and her reverence for the holy table and chapel building demonstrated she rejected the truth that the Gospel was the rule of life for the believer. She sought to bring men into the bondage that she was in

  2. Bierton Church her responsibility

    It was now the responsibility of the Bierton church to terminate my/our membership, according to the Gospel Standard rules adopted in 1981, as any member does not have the authority to terminate their own membership. The Church must do this its self. So long as the church members existed we were still members. The Bierton Church did not, or ever did, terminate the membership of myself, Mrs Irene Clarke or Mr King. This means that should the remaining members die then the remaining member are legitimate inheritors of the churches assets and Trusts. The church members alone can elect new trustee or one become a sole trustees. See Gospel Standard Articles and rules.

    All informed

    Trustees and all churches and people concerned were notified of my actions by me sending a copy of “The Bierton Crisis” which has now been published along with this book.

    The matter was therefore left and the Lord Him self would b the judge between us.

    Our church order and rules are very clear regarding cessation of membership Rule 22 reads.

    Severance of membership

    The severance of any member from this church may be only effected by the church itself acting under its duly appointed officers (pastor and deacons), at a properly convened church meeting (see rules 12-15), in the following instances: -

    1. In respect of an orderly member for transfer to another church of the same faith and order, in which event an honourable dismissal should be granted; or,

    2. By disciplinary action of withdrawal AS A LAST RESORT in the case of any disorderly member neglecting to hear either;

  1. An offended member’s private remonstrance; or, after that,

  2. The additional exhortations of two or three other brethren; or still further,

(3)Theadmonitionofthewholechurch,according to Matt. 18. 15-17.

The Church did not terminate the membership of Mr King, Irene Clarke or Myself. We remain members to this day and was to continue my calling as a preacher and teacher of the gospel not only in the UK but also the Philippines as will be unfolded as my story continues.

Leaving the past looking forward

I felt I had done all I could, according the to scripture and being faithful to my calling as a minister of the gospel. The Lord had called me, separated me from my mother womb to learn the truth so of God. I believed Lord directed me to join the Bierton church and I laboured as best I could according to my abilities and finally came to an end.

I had learned the doctrines of grace, having had no formal religious education but encountered may religious people with conflicting religious beliefs and practices. I finally discovered that although Bierton had a very good set of religious articles of religion, that was not enough. It was found either men were just ignorant of the doctrines of the bible, or were in opposition to the truth. I therefor looks up toward heaven to the lord to direct my feet and

show me the way to go.

The following is a record of the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists Articles of Religion followed by ;

  1. Sermon by FL Gosen relaign to the Law of God

  2. A sermon by J.C. Philpot relating to the Law and Gospel

  3. An article on the Sabbath by Gilbert Beebe

All of which testify and confirm that those matters that I contended for whilst, at the Bierton Church, were scriptural and true.

I would like also to mention that these very errors that I encountered whilst at Bierton are still un-checked and abound in many religious circles today as I will demonstrate and show in my follow books that chart my life as a Christian.

One recommended book, which will help the serious reader and follower of the lord Jesus Christ is by James Stuart Russel entitled, The Parousia,

available from our web site. This book clearly shows that the Destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was in fact The day of the Lord’s vengance as predicted by the law and prophets and Jesus himself. This sealed and confirmed that the Jewish system and Moses rule was brought to an end.

13 The Bierton Society of Particular


Our Articles of Religion Founded in 1831 (Indenture)

And whereas certain persons meet together, and with the blessing of God, will continue to meet together, for the purpose of divine worship, at a chapel or place of worship adjoining the said hereditament and called the Bierton Baptist Chapel and the said persons call them selves “The Society of Particular Baptists” and such persons are herein after meant and referred to by the expression of “The Church” and the said persons believe and pledge themselves to the promulgation and support of the tenets or articles of faith herein after set forth, that is to say,

  1. They believe that the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are given by inspiration of God and are the only rule of faith and practice and that these scriptures reveal the one true and only God who is self-existent, infinite and eternal. That there are three self existent co-eternal persons in the Godhead namely the Father the Son and the

    Holy Ghost and these three are one God and that the Lord Jesus Christ is very God and very man in one glorious complex person.

  2. That Before the world began God did elect a certain number of the human race unto everlasting life and salvation whom He did predestine to the adoption of Children by Jesus Christ of his own free grace and according to the good pleasure of His will.

  3. That God created Adam upright and all his posterity fell in him, he being the federal head and representative of all mankind.

  4. That the Lord Jesus Christ in the fullness of time became incarnate and that he really suffered and died as the substitute for the elect of God only and in their stead whereby he made all the satisfaction for their sins which the law and justice of God could require as well as made a way for the bestowments of all those blessings which are needful for them for time and eternity.

  5. That the eternal redemption which Christ hath obtained by the shedding of his blood is special and

    particular that it is only and intentionally designed for the elect of God who only can share its spiritual blessings.

  6. That the justification of Gods elect is only by the righteousness of Christ imputed to them and received by faith without consideration of any works of righteousness done by them and that the full and free pardon of all there sins and transgressions is only through the full free pardon of all their sins and transgressions is only through the blood of Christ according to the riches of Gods grace.

  7. That regeneration, conversion, sanctification and faith are the work of the Almighty efficacious and invincible grace of God the Holy Ghost.

  8. That all those chosen by the Father, redeemed by the Son and sanctified by the Spirit shall certainly and finally persevere unto eternal life.

  9. That there is a resurrection of the dead both of the just and the unjust and that Christ will come a second time to judge the quick and the dead when he will consign the wicked to everlasting punishment and introduce His own people into his kingdom

and Glory where they shall be for ever with Him.

Custom and Practice

That baptism of believers by immersion and the Lords Supper are ordinances of Christ to be continued until His coming again and that the former is absolutely requisite to the latter, that is to say that only those are to be admitted as members of the church and participate in its privileges including the ordinance of the Lords supper who upon profession of their faith have been baptized namely immersed in water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. And that no person who has not been baptized as afore said shall on any account be permitted to sit down or commune at the “Lords table” within the said school room and whereas for the purpose of giving effect to the objects and intentions of the parties hereto and of the said church it has been agreed that the said hereditaments shall be conveyed to the trustees upon the trust and for the purpose hereinafter contained and these present have been approved by the members of the said Church meeting called for that purpose and held at the said chapel on or before the date hereof.

The indenture further witnesses

  1. That in further pursuance and consideration of the premises they the Trustees do hereby severally covenant and agree amongst themselves and with each other and with the church that they the trustees their successors and assigns shall and henceforth stand and be possessed of the hereditament And premises hereinbefore conveyed unto them in trust to dedicate and devote and preserve the same for the purpose of holy and divine according to the tenets or articles of faith herein set forth.

  2. That the election of any future pastor of the said church and the removal of any pastor shall be decided by the vote of two thirds of the church assembled at a regularly convened church meeting together with the object for which it is convened having been publicly announce for four successive Lords days. No member eligible to vote has to have been four times to the Lords table in six months unless prevented by illness etc.

  3. No minister shall be elected to the pastoral office or continue therein but such as holds to the doctrines and communion aforesaid nor shall

it be lawful for the said church to receive into fellowship any such persons as members but such as have been baptized that is by immersed in water upon confession of their faith in Christ and are able to give some satisfactory account of a work of grace having passed upon their souls in being called out of darkness into Gods marvellous light, nor shall it be lawful for the said church to admit to her communion ( in which term is include the ordinance of the Lords supper) any person who has not been baptized by immersion in water on a profession of faith in the name of Jesus.

  1. The Law and Gospel by F.L. Gosden

    Preached at Gilead Chapel, Brighton, (This is just an extract fro the opening part to his sermon)

    One Lord’s Day evening 3 April 1946

    “Great peace have they which love thy law: nothing shall offend them.” (Psalm 119:165)

    The law in the text is the gospel. The Law of Moses is a good law, holy and just; but it is not a law that sinners love. They reverence it, but it is an authority which can only curse them because they continue not in all things commanded, and shuts them up in prison; it can make nothing perfect; it leaves a sinner where it finds him; it brings him under its condemning power.

    But the law of the text is the law of the gospel. The apostle James speaks of it as ‘the perfect law of liberty.’ It is perfect because it makes the comers thereunto perfect and because the Lord Jesus, Who is the sum and substance of it, is perfect-made perfect through suffering. The Law of Moses was a perfect law of bondage- the perfection of the Mosaic Law is the perfection of the justice of God

    exercised in the condemnation of sinners. The law of the gospel is the perfection of liberty.

    ‘Great peace have they which love thy law.’There is a blessedness in this description of the gospel as being ‘a law’, for where there, is a law there is authority; and Oh, the blessedness of the authority of the gospel as contrasted with the terribleness of the authority of the law. The gospel is greater than the law-not by its abrogation or destruction, but in its fulfilment; its authority abounds over the law, for ‘where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.’ The apostle speaks of it in this way: ‘For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free, from the law of sin and death.’ He then goes on to speak of what the law, could not do. So that we see there are three laws, three authorities, three powers, three dominions spoken of. First, the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus is the law of the gospel making one free, from the law of sin and death; secondly, the dominion of sin in our members. Then there is thirdly, the Law of Moses that is the Ten Commandments; and what this law could not do, ‘in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness

    of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.’That is the authority, the power of the gospel. The apostle -said, ‘I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ’: it is the power or the authority of God in a particular direction and to a blessed end; it is the power of God unto salvation in them that believe. Therein is the righteousness of God revealed, the righteousness of faith?

  2. The Law and Gospel by J.C. Philpot

I shall take the occasion to offer my thoughts on these three distinct points:

1 Why the law is not the believer’s rule of life. 2 What is the rule?

3 Disprove the objection cast upon us that our views lead to doctrinal or practical antinomianism.

By a believer, I understand one who by faith in Christ is delivered from the curse and bondage of the law, and who knows something experimentally of the life, light, liberty and love of the glorious gospel of the grace of God. By the law I understand chiefly, though not exclusively, the Law of Moses. And by the rule of life I understand and outward and inward guide, by following which a believer directs his walk and conversion before God, the Church and the world.

It is very necessary to bear strictly in mind that we are speaking wholly and solely a believer. What has the law to do with a believer in Christ Jesus? Is he required by the revealed will of God to take the

law as a guiding rule in his life? I answer, No; and for several reasons.

  1. God does not leave us at liberty to take at will one part of the law and leave the other. It must be taken as a whole or left as a whole, for God has so revealed it. I cannot find in any part of God’s Word any mitigation of its terms, or any halving of it, so that, according to the views of many divines who have written on the subject, we may be dead to it as a covenant, yet alive to it as a rule. The essential and distinguishing characteristic of the law is that it is a covenant of works, requiring full and perfect obedience, attaching a tremendous curse to the least infringement of its commands. If then I, as a believer, take the law as my rule of life, I take it with its curse; I put myself under its yoke, for in receiving it as my guide, (and if I do not this it is not my rule,) I take it with all its conditions and subject to all its penalties.... The indispensable connection between a covenant and its rules is clearly shown in Gal. 5:1-6, where the apostle testifies to “every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to the whole law”. It is idle to talk of taking the law for a rule of life, and not for a covenant; for the two

    things are essentially inseparable; and as he who keeps the whole law and yet offends in one point, is guilty of all (James 2:10), so he who takes but one precept of the law for his rule, (as the Galatians took that of circumcision,) by taking that one, virtually adopts the whole, and by adopting the whole puts himself under the curse which attaches to their infringement.

  2. People speak very fluently about the law being a rule of life that think little of the resulting consequences; for amongst them is this, that its written precepts and not its mere spirit, must be the rule. Now, these precepts belong to it only as a covenant, for they were never disjoined by the Authority that gave them, and what God hath joined together let no man put asunder. To show this connection between the precepts and the covenant is the chief drift of the Epistle to the Galatians, who were looking to the law and not the gospel, and having begun in the Spirit, were attempting to be made perfect by the flesh. Read with enlightened eyes, this blessed Epistle would at once decide in favour of the gospel as our guiding rule of Christian conduct and conversation. Observe how

    Paul chides those who would so act: he calls them “foolish Galatians”, and asks who hath bewitched them that they should not obey the truth (that is, the gospel),”before whose eyes Jesus Christ has been evidently set forth, crucified among them.” He appeals to their own experience and asks them: “receive ye the Spirit by the works of the law or by the hearing of faith?” He draws a line of distinction here between those works which are done in obedience to the law as a guiding rule, and that power of God felt in the heart which attends a preached gospel when heard in faith, and asks them under which of the two they had received the teaching and testimony of the blessed Spirit. But observe, further, now he bids them “walk in the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16). Now to “walk” is to live and act, and the rule which he here gives for this living and acting is not the law but the Spirit, and he tells them of the blessedness of this divine leading and guiding: “If ye be led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law”: that is, neither as a covenant nor as a rule- that they were free from its curse as a condemning covenant, and from its commands as a galling yoke which neither they nor their fathers could bear (Acts 15:10). But to show them that deliverance form the

    law did not set them free from a higher and more perfect rule of obedience, he bids them “fulfil the law of Christ”, which is love, a fruit of the Spirit and not produced by the law which worketh wrath and gendereth to bondage (Rom. 4:15; Gal. 4:24).

  3. If we are willing to abide by the inspired Word of Truth we need to go no further than this very Epistle to decide the whole question. For in it we have laid down the rule according to which believers should walk, which is a “new creature” (or a new creation): “For in Christ neither circumcision availeth anything nor uncircumcision, but a new creature. And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be upon them, and on the Israel of God” (Gal. 6:15-16). Is the law or the Spirit’s work upon the heart held our here as the rule of a believers walk? The law is strictly a covenant of works; it knows nothing of mercy, reveals nothing of grace, and does not communicate the blessed Spirit. Why, then, if I am a believer in Christ and have received his grace and truth into my heart, am I to adopt for the rule of life that which does not testify of Jesus either in the Word or in my conscience? If I am to walk as a believer, it must be by a life of faith in the

Son of God (Gal 2:20). Is the law my rule here? If it be, where are those rules to be found? “The law is not of faith”. How, then, can it law down rules for the life of faith? If I wish to walk as becomes a believer with the Church, what help will the law give me there? To walk as such must be by the law of love as revealed in Christ and made known in my heart by the power of God. If I am to walk in the ordinances of God’s house, are these to be found revealed in the law?

We give the law its due honour. It had a glory, as the Apostle argues (2Cor 3) as the ministration of death and condemnation, but this glory is done away, and why are we to look to it now as our guiding rule? The ministration of the Spirit, of life, and of righteousness “doth much more exceed in glory”, and why are we to be condemned if we prefer the Spirit to the letter, life to death, and righteousness to condemnation? A rule must influence as well as guide, or else it be a dead rule. If you chose to be guided by the killing letter which can only minister condemnation and death, and we chose for our rule that which ministers the Spirit, righteousness, and life, which has the better rule? It is much to be

feared that those who thus walk and talk have still the veil over their heart, and know nothing of what the Apostle means when he says: “Now the Lord is that Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty. But we all with open face beholding, as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as the Spirit of the Lord” (2Cor 3:17-18).

But not only have we these deductions to influence the mind in rejecting the law as a rule for a believers walk, but also we have the express testimony of God as a warrant for so doing. We read, for instance, “I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God” (Rom. 7:4). As a believer in Christ, the law is dead to me, and I am to it. The Apostle has clearly and beautifully opened up this subject. He assumes that a believer in Christ is like a woman is remarried after the death of her first husband; and he declares that “she is bound by the law of her husband as long as he liveth, but if the husband be dead she is loosed from the law of her husband (verse 2). Of course the first husband is the law, and the second husband is Christ. Now adopting the figure of Paul’s, may we not justly

ask: Which is to be the rule of the wife’s conduct when re-married, the regulations of the first or the second husband?

2. What, then, is the believer’s rule of life. Is he without rule?Alawless wretch because he abandons the Law of Moses for his rule has no guide to direct his steps? God forbid! For I subscribe heart and soul to the words of the Apostle: Being not without law to God, but under law to Christ “(1Cor 9:21) (footnote- not under THE law, as our version; there being no article expressed or implied in the original). The believer then has a guiding rule, which we may briefly call -the gospel. This rule we may divide into 2 branches. The gospel as written by the divine finger upon the heart, and the gospel as written by the blessed Spirit in the Word of truth. These do not form two distinct rules, but the one is the counterpart of the other; and they are mutually helpful to and corroborative of each other. One of the promises of the New Covenant (Jer. 31:21-34; Heb. 8:8-12 compared) was: “I will write My law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts.” This writing of the law of God in their heart, I need not tell you, is that which distinguishes it from the

law of Moses which was written on tables of stone: and becomes an internal rule whereas the law of Moses was but an external rule. This internal rule seems to be pointed out in Romans 8:2 where we find these words: “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has set me free from the law of sin and death.” By “the law of the Spirit of life”, I understand that guiding rule (for a rule in Scripture is frequently called a law; the word law in Hebrew signifying literally “instruction”) which the Spirit of God, as communicating life, is in a believers heart. It is, therefore, the liberating, sanctifying, guiding influence of the Spirit of God, in his soul which, as a law or a rule, delivers him from “the law of sin and death”; by which I understand not so much the law of Moses, as the power and prevalence of his corrupt nature.

If this then be a correct exposition of the text, we have a guiding internal rule distinct from the law of Moses, and a living rule in the heart, which that never was nor could be; for it did not communicate the Spirit (Gal. 3:2-5) But this internal rule as being “the law of the Spirit of life”, has power to lead all the children of God; for in the same chapter (verse

14) the Apostle declares that “as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” This leading which is peculiar to the children of God and is an evidence of their sonship, delivers them from the law; for if we are led by Spirit we are not under the law” (Gal 5:8) either as a covenant or as a rule, for we have a better covenant and a better rule (Heb. 8:6). What is the main use of a rule but to lead? But who can lead like a living Guide? How can a dead law lead a living soul? The very proof that we are the children of God is that we are led by the Spirit; and this inward leading becomes our guiding rule. And is it not a disparaging of the guidance of the blessed Spirit to set up in opposition to His guiding rule a dead law and to call those Antinomians who prefer a living guide to a dead letter? This living guide is that holy, and blessed Spirit who “guides into all truth” (Jn. 16:13).

Here is the main blessedness of the work and grace upon the heart, that the leading and guiding of the blessed Spirit form a living rule every step of the way; for He not only quickens the soul into spiritual life, but maintains the life which He gave, and performs (or finishes- margin) it until the day

of Jesus Christ (Phil. 1:6). This life is eternal, as the blessed Lord at the well of Samaria declared, that the water that he should give the believer should be in a well of water springing up into everlasting life (Jn. 4:14) It is then this springing well in a believer’s soul which is the guiding rule, for, as producing and maintaining the fear of God, it is “a fountain of life to depart from the snares of death” (Pro.14: 27).

But lest this guiding internal rule be abused, which it might be by enthusiasm, and that they might not be left to substitute delusive fancies for the teaching of the Holy Spirit, the God of all grace has given to His people an external rule in precepts of the gospel as declared by the mouth of the Lord and His apostles, but more particularly as gathered up in the epistles as a standing code of instruction for the living family of God. Nor do these at all clash with the rule of which I have just spoken, but on the contrary harmonize entirely and thoroughly with it; for, in fact, it is one and the same rule; the only difference between them being that the blessed Spirit had revealed the one in the written Word, and by the application of that Word to the

soul makes the other to be a living rule of heart.

Now there is not a single part of particle of our walk and conduct before God or man which is not revealed and unculcated in the precepts of the gospel; for, though we have not minute directions, we have what far excels all such unnecessary minutiae- most blessed principles enforced by every gracious and holy motive, and forming, when rightly seen and believed, a most perfect code of inward and outward conformity to the revealed will of God, and of all holy walk and conduct in our families in the church and in the world.

I would say that a believer has a rule to walk but which is sufficient to guide him in every step of the way; for if he has the eternal quickening’s, teachings and leadings of the Spirit to make his conscience tender in the fear of God, and has a law of love written upon the heart by the finger of God; and besides this has the precepts of the gospel as a full and complete code of Christian obedience, what more can he want to make him perfect in every good word and work (Heb. 13:21). Can the law do any of these things for him? Can it give him life, in the first instance, when it is a killing letter? Can it

maintain life, if it is not in its power to bestow it?

But it may be asked: Do you then set aside the two great commandments of the law: “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God” etc. and “thy neighbour as thyself”? No, On the contrary, the gospel as an external and internal rule fulfils them both, for “love is the fulfilling of the law.” (Rom. 13:10). So this blessed rule of the gospel not only does not set aside the law as regards its fulfilment, but so to speak absorbs into itself and glorifies and harmonizes its two great commandments, by yielding to them in obedience of heart, which the law could not give; for the believers serves in the newness of the Spirit, not in the oldness of the letter (Rom 7:6), as Christ’s freeman (Jn. 8:32) and not as Moses’s bond slave. This is willing obedience not a legal task. This will explain the meaning of the Apostle: “For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: for the new man of grace, under the powerful influence of the Holy Spirit, delights in the law of God, not only for its holiness, but as inculcating that to do which fills the renewed heart and the inward delight -love to God and His people...

  1. The Christian and the Mosaic Law

    By Philip Mauro

    The Gentile Believer and The Law

    We have said that the experience of the “wretched man” of Romans 7 is not the normal experience of a converted Gentile. It is, nevertheless, a sad fact that it may (and often does) become the abnormal experience of converted Gentiles, who, through ignorance of the great gospel truths revealed in Romans, or through the influence of Judaizing teachers and legal systems of theology, fall from their standing in grace, and seek justification, or the gift of the Spirit, through law-works. Hence the solemn warning of Galatians 5:4: “You are deprived of all effect from Christ, whosoever in law are being justified; you are fallen from grace.” For as there were in Paul’s day, so are there now, many who desire “to be of the law, understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.”

    So also the struggle of that “wretched man” becomes the experience of many unconverted Gentiles who, totally ignorant of remission of sins through faith in the blood of Christ.... are seeking

    perpetually (because seeking vainly) for and inclination of the heart to keep the Mosaic Law. The condition of such, if they be earnest and sincere in their desire to keep the law, is indeed “wretched” in the extreme.

    It was needful, therefore, that, in addition to the revelation given in Romans 7 of deliverance for the believing Jew from the yoke of the Law, the Epistle to the Galatians should have been incorporated into the Word of God, in order to instruct and warn Gentile believers against putting themselves under that yoke.

    In referring, however, to Galatians our object will be simply to seek the light it throws upon the conflict described in Romans 7. What we find in Galatians affords strong confirmation to the view that the experience described in Romans 7 is that of a conscientious unconverted Israelite, and not at all a “Christian” experience. In fact, the main object of the Apostle in writing to the assemblies of Galatia was to warn them against teachings, which would lead them into such an experience.

    Galatians 2

    In Galatians 2 Paul relates how he remonstrated with the Apostle Peter for compelling the Gentiles to live as do the Jews (v. 14). We may be sure that the matter in dispute is esteemed by the Spirit of God to be exceedingly important; otherwise it would not be brought to our attention in the form of a rebuke administered by Paul, the Apostle to the Gentiles, to Peter, the leader of the twelve. In this connection Paul draws the line sharply between Jews and Gentiles, saying: “We, Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man in not justified out of the works of the Law, but out of the faithfulness of Christ, even we [Jews] have believed on Christ Jesus that we might be justified out of the faithfulness of Christ, and not out of works of Law” (vv. 15-16). And he adds: “For if I build again the things I threw down, I constitute myself a transgressor.” That is to say, if he should set up the Law again as an obligation for himself, he would make himself a law-breaker. “For,” he continues, “I through the Law died to the Law, that I might live to God.” Here Paul again brings himself forward, as a typical Jew, and repeats in few words the doctrine elaborated in Romans 7. “I have been crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live”; or, as the

    Greek may be equally well rendered, “I am not any longer living, it is Christ that lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by the faithfulness of the Son of God.”

    It is possible for every believer to reach the place where he can make this saying of Paul his own. It involves death to sin and life to God in Christ, and the abiding presence of the Spirit of Him who raised up Christ from the dead. This verse obviously contains a condensed statement of the truth revealed in Romans 6 and 7 concerning the believer’s death (as to his old nature) with Christ, and his living again in the supernatural life of the risen Christ. That new life is not lived under the Law of Sinai.

    “I do not,” says Paul, “make void the grace of God” (as Peter was doing by his dissimulation and by returning to the practice of Judaism) “for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died for nothing” (v. 21).

    Galatians 3

    Having thus dealt with the case of the believing

    Jew, who had been delivered from the Law by means of Christ’s death, the Apostle directly addresses the Galatians, who, being Gentiles, never were under Law, but began their relations with God in the Spirit. The Jew began his service of God in the flesh. For him, therefore, there might be found some excuse for continuing after conversion as a man in the flesh under Law, not exercising the liberty wherewith Christ had made him free. But for Gentile believers, who never were under the Law, but had the great advantage of beginning in the Spirit, to put themselves under Law and to attempt to be perfected in the flesh was the “senseless” action of those who had been “bewitched.” “O senseless Galatians, who had bewitched you,” that you should act thus after the truth concerning Christ crucified has been plainly put before you? “Are you so senseless? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being perfected in the flesh?” (Gal. 3:1-3). It was indeed “senseless” in the extreme to undertake the perfecting in the flesh of the work that was begun in the Spirit.

    The Apostle then refers to Abraham, whose faith was accounted to him for righteousness, and points

    out that the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles out of faith, proclaimed that good news to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all nations (Gentiles) be blessed.” (Gal. 3:8).

    The Galatians are warned of two serious facts. First, Paul teaches that all who are of the works of Law (in contrast to those that are “of faith”) are under the curse of the Law. Second, he asserts that the curse comes upon every one who continues not in all things, which are written in the book of the Law to do them. From this it follows that no one is being justified with God in virtue of Law: “For the just shall live out of faith; but the man that does those things (required by the Law) shall live in virtue of them” (vv. 10-12).

    In view of this, it would naturally be asked, How does it come about that the Jews, who were placed under the Law, which none of them has kept, have escaped from the curse of the Law? The answer is, “Christ has redeemed us (Jews) from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us.” This statement manifestly applies solely to Israel, for the curse of the Law was never pronounced against the Gentiles. Hence Paul uses in verse 3:13 the

    pronoun “us.” The contrast between Jews and Gentiles is again clearly marked by 3:14, which goes on to say that Christ was made a curse for the Jews in order that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles in Christ Jesus. The contrast between the curse of the Law, pronounced upon those who were under the Law, and the blessing of Abraham coming to the Gentile believers in Christ, is very instructive. And an additional result of the endurance by Christ of the curse of the Law is then set forth, namely, that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

    The promise was made to Abraham and to his seed long before the Law was given. From this it follows that the Law, which was given 430 years after, cannot nullify the promise. If then the Law was not given for the purpose of adding anything to the promise, or of taking anything from it, why was it given? It was added for the sake of transgressions that is in order that the repeated transgressions of the Law by every Israelite might reveal the presence and nature of sin in the flesh, and show the futility of attempting to secure justification out of Law- works. Moreover, it was given, not as a permanent

    institution, but only “until the Seed should come to whom the promise was made.” (3:19).

    This statement shows that the period of the Law was strictly limited in time, as it was limited also in scope to the children of Israel. Its era did not begin until 430 years after God had begun to deal with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their descendants; and it ceased when the promised Seed died under the Law. The curse of the Law was exhausted when Christ was made curse by hanging on a tree (Deut. 21:23). Whatever God’s purposes were with the Law, they were all accomplished when the promised Seed died on the Cross? Since that event even the Jew is no longer a man under Law, for by no amount of law keeping can he now secure the promised blessings of the Promised Land. The old covenant is entirely at an end (2 Cor. 3:7- 11; Heb. 7:13). The words on the Cross-, “It is finished” (in the original it is the single word “accomplished”) included the purpose of the Law, which thereupon came to an end.

    The temporary character of the Law as a Divine institution is further set forth, with great clearness, in verses 23-25. “Before faith came,” says the

    Apostle, “we [Jews] were kept [or guarded] under Law, having been shut up to the faith which was about to be revealed. Wherefore the Law has been our pedagogue [tutor] up to Christ in order that out of faith we might be justified. But faith having come, we are no longer under a tutor.” By noting the tenses of the verbs, as given in the above renderings, the sense will be readily and clearly apprehended. It is very clear indeed that these statements apply only to Israelites. The Gentiles were not kept under Law, but were left without Law. They were not “shut up” in any way, but allowed to follow the devices of their own hearts. They were not under a pedagogue, or under tutors and governors (4:2), for God had no dealings with them. God has called Israel His “Son” (Hosea 11:1; see Amos 3:2); and of Israel alone, of all the peoples of the earth, can it be said that they were under tutors waiting the time appointed of the Father.

    After speaking in the first person of the Jews, the Apostle, addressing the Gentile Galatians, says by way of contrast: “For you are all the children of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put

    on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek.” The contrast between the “we” of verses 24,25 and the “you” of verse 26 is very significant.

    Some of the statements (in Galatians 4) are broad enough to embrace both Jews and Gentiles, for both were, before conversion, in bondage to the elements of the world; but the special bondage of the Jew - the yoke of the Law and the penalty of its curse - is also specifically mentioned. As the heir is “under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father; even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fullness of time was come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem those that were under the Law, that we [Jews] might receive the status of sons. But because you [Gentiles] are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, ‘Abba Father.’” (4:2-6) The defective reading of verse 6 in the A.V. “And because you are sons,” instead of “But,” as it is in the original, hides the contrast between the case of the believing Israelite and that of the believing Gentile. The former needed to be redeemed from under the Law before

    he could receive the status of a son (“adoption of sons”); whereas for the latter there was no such need. The bondage of the Gentiles was a different kind of bondage. They, not knowing God at all, were in bondage to those who by nature are not gods (4:8); but the point we wish to examine is that they were not under Law at any time, and this point is very clearly presented in the passage we have been examining. (Editor’s note: Randall Seiver has presented a better explanation of this passage in his book on Galatians “The Fullness of Time” available from Sound of Grace, Webster N.Y.

    The Believer’s State Is Not One Of Lawlessness In emphasizing the important truth that the

    believer is not under the Law, because, if a Jew he

    was delivered from the yoke of the Law by the death of Christ, and if a Gentile he was never under the Law at all, must not obscure the important fact that the state of the believer is not one of lawlessness - far from it. What is spoken of in Romans 7, as “the Law” is the Law given to the Israelites through Moses? That Law was by no means a complete statement of God’s requirements, though it was quite sufficient for the purpose of revealing the presence of sin in

    the flesh, for demonstrating the utter corruption of human nature, and for making manifest the exceeding sinfulness of sin. The teachings of Jesus Christ showed that the full requirements of God’s holiness and righteousness are far above those of the Law of Moses. “You have heard that it was said by (or to) them of old, you shall not kill...But I say to you, whoever is angry with his brother without a cause, etc.” (Matt. 5:21-48).

    The believer of this dispensation is not living under the Law of Moses. That law was given for the regulation of the conduct of men in the flesh. The believer is “not in the flesh, but in the Spirit.” (Rom. 8:9). He is not, therefore, in the sphere in which the Law of Moses was effective.

    The child of God, though not under the Law of Moses, is “not without Law to God, but in-law to Christ” (ennomous Christou, 1 Cor. 9:21). He owns the risen Christ as His Lord, and judges that his entire life in the body is to be lived no longer unto himself, but unto Him who died for him and rose again (2 Cor. 5:15). Being in the Spirit he is to be governed by “the law of the Spirit” (Rom. 8:2). Being in Christ he is to “fulfil the law of Christ”

    (Gal. 6:2). This is a condition very different from that of the Israelite under the Law of Moses, and on a much higher plane. The life of the child of God is not a life hedged about by constraints and prohibitions, but a life of liberty in which he is free to follow all the leadings of the Spirit, and all the inclinations of the new nature, which the Spirit imparts, to those whom He quickens. It is a life of freedom - not freedom to sin, but freedom not to sin. He who practices sin is the slave of sin; only the free man can refuse obedience to the demands of sin, and yield himself to God as one who is alive from the dead. The Word of God abounds in directions addressed to the children of God, by which their walk, while yet in the body, is to be guided and controlled. These directions are found in the commandments of Christ, and in the Epistles of the Apostle Paul, whom the risen Lord empowered to be the channel for the revelation of His special communications to and concerning the Church. And these directions are illustrated by all the Holy Scriptures, the things which happened to the Israelites having been written, not for our imitation, but for our admonition (1 Cor. 10:11).

    The believer has been called into liberty; and he is exhorted to stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made him free (Gal. 5:1). Yet he is not to use his liberty so as to furnish occasions for gratifying the desires of his old nature (Gal. 5:13). Having been brought, through the resurrection of Christ, into the sphere of the Spirit, the believer is commanded to remain there; that is, to be occupied with and interested in the things of the Spirit. While so engaged he cannot at the same time be fulfilling the desires of the flesh. “This I say then, walk in [or by] the Spirit, and you shall not fulfil the desires of the flesh” (Gal. 5:16). “If you be led of the Spirit you are not under the Law” (Gal. 5:18).

    Ephesians, which especially reveals the position of believers as quickened together with Christ, raised up (i.e. Ascended) together with Him, and seated together in the heavenlies in Christ, abounds in practical directions for the believer’s guidance in all his earthly relations. attention to them in order to guard against the supposition that, because the believer of this dispensation is not under the Law of Moses, he is therefore in a state of lawlessness.

    The main points, then, of the teaching we have been examining are these:

    1. That the sufferings of Christ were incurred for the sins of His people, that is to say, the sins of those whom God justifies upon the principle of faith.

    2. That the death of Christ delivers the believing sinner, whether Jew or Gentile, rom the servitude of sin.

    3. That the death of Christ also brought the economy of the Law to an end, and delivered all converted Israelites from the yoke of the Law.

    4. That the resurrection of Christ brings all believers into the sphere of a new humanity, where there is a new life, whose Source is the risen Christ, which life is imparted by the Spirit of God to the believer while the later is yet in the mortal body.

    5. That believers, though not under the Law of Moses, are governed by the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, and are required to “fulfil the law of Christ.”

  2. The Sabbath By Gilbert Beebe

    January 1, 1855

    There is much said at the present day on the subject of a Sabbath day, as being of perpetual obligatory force on all mankind throughout all time. But in what part of the Scriptures they find a precept to that effect we are not informed. They certainly but seldom, if ever, refer us to the fourth commandment of the Decalogue; and we have supposed their reasons for not doing so were obvious.

    1. Because we are expressly informed by Moses himself that, that very covenant, or law, was made exclusively with those Israelites who were all of them then present, and alive on the day that the ten commandments were presented to them from the Mount of God. It was a law which, had not been given even to the patriarchs, (See Deut. 5:1-4).

    2. Because the fourth commandment required those unto whom it was given, to observe the seventh, and not the first day of the week, as the Sabbath of their God—because that God had rested from the work of creation on the seventh, and not on the first day of the week.

    3. Because the children of Israel were by the fourth commandment required to observe the seventh day altogether differently from the manner in which professed Christians pretend to observe the first day. The children of Israel were to totally abstain from all labour, themselves, their wives, their children, their servants, and even their cattle; no fires were allowed to be kindled, no horses to be harnessed, no meetings to be attended, no Sabbath Schools to be kept, no collections for mission or other purposes, to be taken up on that day.

    4. Because the penalty for a transgression of that precept, was altogether different from that inflicted by modern Sabbatarians for a breach of the Sunday laws of our own, or any other lands. That provided in the Jewish law, being death by stoning, and the laws of men only requiring fines and imprisonments.

    5. The fourth commandment required those unto whom it was given to labour six days, including the first day, and the Sunday laws of our land forbid our obedience to that part of the fourth commandment which requires us to labour on the first day of the week.

      We know of no partial obligation to keep the law. If the Sinai covenant, which was given exclusively to the children of Israel, is binding on the Gentiles to any extent, it must be binding in its full extent. An inspired apostle has settled this question beyond all reasonable dispute, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all,” (Jam. 2:10). And Paul to the Galatians, 5:3, shows who are debtors to keep the law. He says, “For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.” But in searching the Scriptures, we can find none who are obligated to obey part of the law, or partly obligated to do the whole law. “Whatsoever the law saith, it saith to them that are under the law,” and they are of course bound to go according to the letter of the commandment. The grand question then is, whether the whole Sinai law is binding on all men, and throughout all time? If so, then all are involved in the curse, and the salvation of any of the human family is impossible. For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for all have sinned; and consequently by the deeds of the law, no flesh shall be justified in the sight of God.

      The doctrine of redemption is very prominently set forth in the gospel; and Christ has not only redeemed his people from the curse, but also from the dominion of the law; and the apostle has made the emphatic proclamation to the saints, “Ye are no more under the law, but under grace.” The inquiry then is reduced to this; How far are we obligated to keep a law that we are not under? When Paul found some of the brethren inclining to the works of the law, he was afraid of them, lest he had bestowed on them labour in vain, for they observed days, and months, and times, and years. In his allegory, (Gal. 4:21-27), Paul sets forth the old Sinai covenant, by the person of Hagar, the bondwoman, who could not be the mother of a free child. For this Agar is Mount Sinai, in Arabia, which answereth to Jerusalem, which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem, which is above, is free, which Jerusalem he affirms, is the mother of all those saints, who, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. In the second chapter to the Colossians, we are informed that Christ has blotted out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took them out of the way, nailing them to his cross; and having

      spoiled principalities and powers, he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect to an holy day, or of the new moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. This language would seem to be plain enough for an ordinary Christian, taught of God. These ordinances of the old covenant were a shadow of things, which are realized in the body of Christ, or in the gospel church, which is his body, his flesh and his bones. We trace the shadowy import of the Sinai Sabbath to the body of Christ, or to the gospel church, and there we enter into that rest which was shadowed forth by the legal Sabbaths of the old covenant. The anti typical Sabbath, being found alone in that rest which remaineth for the children of God, and into which all those who, with a true and vital faith, believe in our Lord Jesus Christ, have entered, is clearly set forth in the New Testament, particularly in the third and fourth chapters to the Hebrews. This gospel Sabbath we understand to be the whole gospel dispensation; in distinction from the old covenant dispensation, and it begins severally with each believer in Christ, as soon as they truly

      believe in our Lord Jesus Christ; and are enabled to rest alone on him for their justification before God. We have neither the time nor the space necessary to show the analogy, which the typical Sabbath of the law bears to the rest, which is enjoyed by the saints in the gospel. A very few particulars must for the present suffice, and,

      1.TheoldcovenantSabbathwasgivenexclusively to the circumcised children of Israel, and to no other people; so the gospel Sabbath, or Rest, is given exclusively to the spiritual Israel, who are the circumcision which worship God in the spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

      2. The children of the old Sinai covenant were often charged with the sin of Sabbath-breaking, and that sin, with them, consisted in their performing on the seventh day, such labour as was only lawful for them to perform in the six days in which they were commanded to do all their labour. So under the gospel dispensation, the saints, by adhering to the abrogated institutions of the old working dispensation, observing days, and months, and times, and years; or by looking for justification

      before God by anything short of the blood and righteousness of Christ, do violence to the holy Sabbath of the gospel. As in the types, many of the children of Israel could not enter into rest, because of unbelief, so we find that our doubts and unbelief, which often press us down, render it impossible for us to enter into that rest which remaineth for the children of God. Our own experience teaches us that when we doubt the reality of our interest in Christ, or the application of his promises to us, we are like the troubled ocean that cannot rest: we labour, and toil to do something ourselves, to reinstate ourselves in the favour of the Lord. When we feel cold, we are prone to kindle fires of our own, and to comfort ourselves with sparks of our kindling, and endeavour to walk in the light of our fire; but if we are truly the children of God, we shall for all this lie down in sorrow; for this Sabbath-breaking. No fires were to be kindled by the Israelites on that day. Nor will the Lord suffer us to warm or enlighten ourselves by any fires that we can make. Christians are commanded to forsake not the assembling of themselves together for the worship of God, and for their mutual edification. To obey the command, suitable times must be

      appointed for such meetings; the first, or any other day of the week, may be designated, provided that we attach no special sanctity to the time; and the first day of the week is as suitable as any other day. The apostles met frequently on the first day, and also on all the other days of the week, they were daily in the temple praising God, &c. So we conclude that the Christian church is at liberty to make her own appointments, as to time—provided that she allows no man, or set of men, to judge her in regard to the time, and when she makes such appointments, each member is in duty bound to attend the appointment, unless providentially detained.

      As Christians we have no right to observe any day religiously in obedience to human legislation; either Sabbaths, first days, or thanksgiving days; because God has forbidden that we should allow any man to judge us in these things. We require no human legislation on the subject. The order and decision of the church is more effectual with the saints than all the pains, penalties and fines, ever imposed by the rulers of the darkness of this world. Let us observe the admonition of the apostle, and

      “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free; and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.”

      The Sabbath of the Jews required no grace in the heart, no spiritual emotion of the new man, to qualify those to whom it was given, to observe it. Their service was in the oldness of the letter, and theirs was a worldly sanctuary, and carnal ordinances. Any circumcised Jew, whether a believer or an infidel could abstain from labours on the seventh day, and that was all that was required of them. But the anti typical, or gospel Sabbath, requires faith in Christ; for none but believers can enter into that rest which remains, for the people of God. The hour has is come and the true worshipers must worship God in spirit and in truth. Not only the Scriptures of the New Testament declare it, but the testimony is corroborated by every Christian’s experience. Christians know that they cannot believe only as the Lord gives them faith; and equally well do they know that they cannot rest unless they believe.

      When faith, which is of the operation of God, is given, the recipient requires neither the thunder of Sinai, nor the arm of secular legislation, to incline

      him to keep the Christian Sabbath of gospel rest. The starving soul requires no coercion to incline him to eat, nor does the weary, heavy-laden soul require legal enactments to drive him to his rest. As the Sinai Sabbath required the carnal Israelite to abstain totally from servile labour, so the gospel Sabbath requires the spiritual Israelite to cease from his work, and trust, and rest alone on Christ, for his justification and acceptance with God. As the Sabbath-breaker under the law was to be stoned to death, by all the children of Israel, so the legalist who would attempt to drag the ceremonies of the legal dispensation into the gospel church, or to justify himself before God by the works of the law, is to be stoned, (not with stones literally, but with the smooth stones from the brook of gospel truth), by all his brethren, until his legal spirit yields up the ghost.

      Those who have no higher conception of a gospel Sabbath than to suppose it consists in the literal observance of one day out of seven, have yet to learn

      that “Whom the Son makes free, are free indeed.”

  3. Other Publications of David

  1. The Bierton Crisis, which deals with David joining and secession from the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptist Church. This is available on request and not published.

  2. Mary, Mary Quite Contrary, which deals with the rise of women seeking positions of eldership in churches. In this I deal with scriptural teaching regarding Marriage, divorce and remarriage and in particular what the scripture taught concerning male and female relationships.

  3. Converted on LSD, Extended Edition. This deals my David’s conversion from crime to Christ and him joining the Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists

  4. Trojan Warriors, This contains the story of Michael conversion and our mission to the Jails of the Philippines. It contains 66 testimonies of converted criminal from crime to Christ all from New Bilibid Prison.

  5. Before the Cock Crows. This deals with the successes and troubles that we experienced on our

    missions to the Philippines, showing the doctrinal and practical errors that we encountered, and suggestions how to avoid them.

  6. Converted on LSD Trip 2nd Edition. This is the whole story relating to Michael and I and the range of difficulties that I experienced since leaving the Bierton Church. I deal with Marriage, Divorce, Imprisonment, travel abroad, preaching in the Jails of the Philippines.

  7. The Bierton Strict and Particular Baptists, My Testimony and Confession; Set for a Defence of the Gospel. This is a complete work relating to my call, joining the Bierton Church and being sent as a minister including my secession for the Bierton Church. My work in taking the Gospel to the Philippines and the establishment of our Trojan Horse International (TULIP) Phils. Incorporation. To the sending of William Poloc and him founding churches in Baguio City.

  8. Mission to the Philippines. This tells the story of David’s mission to the Philippines and work in the various prisons. It tells of the successes and the opposition to their gospel work. It also outlines the

errors and the truth of the gospel that will enable and help others should they find themselves in a similar position.

DC 2012