Evangelical Thugs: The “Reverend” Bully and his Entourage … The Pathetic Attack Upon Arthur W Pink

Has every trace of a human conscience
been utterly eradicated from this arrogant,
barely literate, re-engineered version
of the human race … ?

IF any modern-day, church-attending receiver of gossip
wants to know anything about Arthur W Pink,
they might have the common decency and moral integrity
to check and consider what Arthur W Pink wrote:

and NOT what a biographer (or any other Johnny-come-lately
jumping on the ‘Pink’ bandwagon), chooses to release
to the book-buying public.

Refusing to sit by and hear the degradation
of the comparative CAVE MEN of 21st-century “Christianity”
heaped upon non-compromising Christian men and women,
I am quite willing to defend this man’s character.

I am not the least bit concerned with –

how many ‘letters’ you have behind your name;

how large the ignorant multitude that gasps
with ecstatic adoration at your every utterance;

or how important you Think you are …

ANY reader of this article –

“Reverend”, “Pastor”, Doctor,
Professor, Narcissist, Thug,
Obnoxious Internet Site Owner,
or Conscientious Inquirer

– may contact me with honest enquiries
about this sober-minded, Narrow-Way-walking
man of integrity and humility.

From Part 2 … “Choice Target”

No one – (possessed of a conscience) –
can fail to see the significance
that is illustrated when, standing in Stornoway cemetery,
one faces the grey stone monolith
that marks Kenneth MacRae’s grave …

… and then turns one’s head ninety degrees to the left
to see the patch of bare grass that marks the resting place
of Arthur and Vera Pink.

I have done just that …
and it is a truly disgusting visual comparison.


I attended the same church in Edinburgh as Iain Murray
– a kind and humble man indeed;
yet it was with great self control that I did not ask him
why his re-printed 2004 biography
removed the theological ‘backbone’ from Pink
that was so freely given, and evident,
in the 1981 original.

A man writes a book – and all his adoring readers IMAGINE
that … he … is the only man with knowledge of its subject.


“I am presenting FACTS in relation TO Arthur W Pink
… written BY Arthur W Pink,

and do so, in order to defend this righteous man’s name
and character from degradation
by such low-grade ‘pastors’ and assorted pew-warmers
as delight to promulgate wholesale malicious ignorance
about Arthur W Pink.

Perhaps CHURCH-GOING slanderers who DO precisely this
might discover a conscience …

… and repent of their Sin in furthering the degradation
and false witness
of an honourable man of integrity whose boots
– I may speculate,
the bulk of them would not be fit to clean.

I do not hesitate to place my name,
experience, and face,
in defence of this man’s character.”

P Livingstone [ End of Excerpt ]

A defence of Arthur W Pink,
from the slanderous aspersions
and Self-admitted WILFUL ignorance
of an American ‘pastor’
and his entourage of fellow ‘pastors’, ‘elders’, and other
(supposedly-Christian) thugs.

[ A thorough refutation may be found
in the accompanying essay: “Arthur W Pink:
Choice Target of Evangelical Thugs” – PL ]

“… the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you
will think that he doeth God service.”

There are people in this world who –
having experienced the lies, hypocrisy and malice
of many who claim to be “Christians”

– despise (as a result)
anyone who calls themselves a Christian.

To do this is wrong.

If I take a cup, which appears whole, yet has a crack
– which I cannot see … and in pouring in hot tea,
the cup breaks –

do I then believe that all cups
are corrupt and useless?

Now, I do not have to believe in fairies or trolls to check
for some detail within the pages of Grimm’s Fairy Tales.

In equal manner, one need not be a Christian to open the pages
of an old Bible in order to determine the veracity
of those who CLAIM to be “Christians”.

It is simply a matter of “going to the source”
in order to confirm (or refute) a fact (or assertion).

This is precisely what I did when writing
my 2002 dissertation, “The Religious Humanism
of the Modern Evangelical Church”.

Going to the source … to find the facts.

Like these malignant creatures could have done,
rather than wallow in self-admitted ignorance
and broadcast their lack of character, witlessness,
and malice concerning Arthur Pink.

From the abundance of the heart,
the mouth speaketh.

In the case of malignant “Christian” bullies,
con men, despots and abusers, one goes to the source
by comparing the conduct and conversation
of so-called “Christians”, with the pages in an old Bible.

[ An ‘old’ Bible – not one of the deluge of modernist surrogates
that have “re-translated” and cast doubt and question –
“Yea, hath God said?” – upon everything the actual Bible says. ]

Every promise and declaration in that old Bible is … Qualified:
that is, there are moral ‘conditions’ attached.

Take the ‘wisdom of the aged’, for example …

There was a time (ending about 30 years ago) in which people
with a semblance of humility and respect for others,
generally imagined that anyone who was old in years,
or experienced in some particular endeavour – was therefore
… Wise.

In that old Bible, wisdom associated with old age
is most definitely QUALIFIED:

“The hoary head is a crown of glory, IF
it be found in the way of righteousness.” [ Proverbs 16:31 ]

An Old belligerent fool is simply
an Experienced belligerent fool.

Listen to WHAT is being said; note HOW it is spoken,
and you will know what is standing before you.

The prime indicator of a Genuine Christian is
what is termed … Love to the Saints.

A Christian will love all who live
in humility of conscience
under the sovereignty of God in this world.

The whole conscience of a (genuine) Christian
is geared to being Holy.

IF they err, they err on the side of the ‘narrow way’
– NOT a wide one.

A genuine Christian is peaceful, and does everything
in his power to live peaceably with all men.

Those who find it a simple matter to ridicule quiet,
conscionable men and women,
openly declare what manner of spirit activates them.

They vomit their abuse at conscientious people
who maintain standards and self-discipline that they will not;
and think to sanction their malice and cruelty
by spewing isolated scripture texts.

They will not APPLY biblical writ to individual or UNIQUE situations
because they have neither the Wisdom, Compassion,
Maturity, or Moral capacity so to do.

They spew Bible texts like a weapon.

They are thugs.

Because such pathetic creatures will never ‘be anything’,
they ‘elevate’ themselves … by degrading
CONSCIENTIOUS men and women,
who were benefitting humanity
long before their mediocre existence began.

Clicking the wrong ‘link’ led me to one particularly
loathsome display in which a “Christian” ‘pastor’
targeted the name of a certain Arthur W Pink.

Pink [1886-1952] was a man whose voluminous
and exceedingly in-depth writing
in a monthly theological periodical,
extended unbroken for … Thirty … YEARS.

Just ONE issue of his monthly periodical
possesses more depth
and integrity of thought and application

than the pathetic bulk of comic-book-level,
pseudo-religious, humanistic scribblings
that have appeared on ‘evangelical’ bookshelves
over the past 30 years and more

… Combined.

Pink is an exceedingly popular target for evangelical thugs.
The ‘page’ that opened on my unintended click
revealed something that I had not thought possible:

here, an American ‘pastor’ made a point of noting
that he was ‘defeated’ – could not read Mr Pink,
because Pink’s precise English vocabulary
was too “verbose” for him –

NOTE: A pig, who can but grunt,
considers a man who can speak
to be ‘long-winded’.

– and so, having read next to nothing,
and given up,
this particular pastor proceeded to declare
that he read other books
that said the ‘same thing’
as what Pink was trying to say.

Which begs the question:
How would he know What Pink ‘was trying to say’
– having not read Pink in the first place?

It is a statement of such abject stupidity
and unbridled arrogance,
that it is difficult to believe that it could be made
by a man who considers himself suitably qualified
to teach other people.

No schoolboy (not in 1960’s Britain,
when I was in school anyway)
would have the temerity to submit a Book Report,
without having read the book.

And yet here is a ‘pastor’ who finds no difficulty in –
not only submitting such a report, but in degrading
the name and character of the author
at the same time.

A vanity-soaked bully needs no excuse
to prey on some suitable target;
nor will he make any effort to find out facts
before exercising his malice.

More than often, the victim is someone
whose conscience or accomplishments
… far exceed his own.

Discretion shall preserve thee,
understanding shall keep thee:
to deliver thee from the way of the evil man …

Like all schoolyard bullies, there is The Entourage –
the satellite minions who smirk, guffaw, or spew catcalls
and invective from ‘the side-lines’ –

“Yeah, Butch, that’s tellin’ him!”
“Right on, Butch, give it to ‘im!”
“Ha ha, how’d ya like that, loser?”

Bullies always attract the approval of ignorant,
like-minded thugs.

Seeing someone make the bold pronouncement
that he knew next-to-nothing about a person,
and yet proceeded to denigrate the man,
one MIGHT reasonably expect that Anyone
seeing such an admission of Ignorance,

appended to the defamation of a man of whom
a slanderer has just admitted knowing Nothing,

would immediately reprove and disassociate themselves
from this individual until such time
as an apology was publicly placed;
and the offensive and degrading commentary removed.

But, No.

Instead, hordes of like-minded ignoramuses
crop up to add their own malignant aspersions,
and display their utter lack of moral character
to the world.

One remarked that many of the ‘men’ commenting
were themselves ‘pastors’ or ‘elders’ in a local ‘church’.

The pastor chimed in to declare that he had deleted
comments which said (according to him) no more than

“I love [Mr] Pink” (and therefore,
contributed nothing to the topic);

and yet he permits the infantile mentality
of a comment on his own Internet site
from some creature, stating of Pink:
“He sounds like a kook.”

This is not the conduct of a mature man.

No honourable atheist would act
with such a lack of integrity.

This is the act of a coward
who will not allow fair comment.

These are not – not to anyone of discernment –
the actions of biblical Christians.

So much for the integrity of ‘the local church’,
if THIS is what ‘leads’ ( never mind populates )
its Sunday morning social gatherings.

But then, this ‘pastor’ actually obliges me
to become involved
in his malignant display of ignorance …

Not content to spew his arrogance at Pink,
he targets the several thousand souls –
many of whom expressed their loneliness and distress
at having No God-honouring church to attend;
and who found edification in Pink’s work –

( having actually possessed enough mental acuity,
and command of the English language to actually
read Pink’s work ).

Now, there is nothing that can make me
lose my composure

… save Cruelty.

And at this point, this ‘pastor’ went from ignorant fool
to vicious predator. He declares in his rhapsody of Ignorance:

“Here is a man in rebellious isolation, probably being read
by people in similar rebellious isolation.
Paper pastor to paper saints.”


“Paper Saints”?

I am no more disposed
to witness the attacks of malignant bullies
than was Moses or Peter:

A response was sent personally,
and this current article then written –
as a result of that despicable comment.

In biblical doctrine, “The Church” is the collection of all the elect
[ that is, Redeemed souls chosen by God the Father ].

It is NOT a gathering of casually-dressed ‘believers’,
hypocrites, and ethical atheists …

… who go to a “church” once a week
in order to (as they imagine) earn a ticket out of hell;
or make their consciences feel better;

all united together for an hour or so
of happy-clappy choruses,
modernised ‘bible’ readings for the barely literate,
and self-esteem ‘sermons’ on a Sunday morning;

to then leave the “church” ready for a new week
of watching the mental and moral sewage of television
(or, incredibly, attending the cinema);

imitating, acting, and sounding like the world;
and even despising men and women
whose standards of practical godliness
could not so much as be imagined (much less imitated)
by such cock-sure religious hypocrites.

It is a mark of conceit – in sad, domineering narcissists –
to make great fanfare about the fact that they are:

‘a professional’,
‘a pastor’,
‘an elder’,
member of a club,
holder of an academic degree,

or any other such institutional achievements
or appointments
as are used to convince the simple-minded
that those so employed … are above reproach.

Of the instances of multitudes of corrupt police, politicians,
pastors, professors, and priests, history … is absolutely saturated.
In contrast, the principled and honourable man
whom these creatures despise and ridicule,
refused to be called by any honorific:

“… we respectfully request that none of our readers
will address us as “Rev” : no worm of the dust
is due such a title. It is written “holy and reverend
is HIS [that is, God’s] name” (Psa. 111:9).” [ Arthur Pink ]

The prime indicator of the genuineness of a pastor
who is called … of God … is that he will be a gentle man
of Meekness and Humility.

He will not be ‘abrasive’, will not gloat:

Much less be bold to degrade people.

He will correct error in humility, with tenderness, and even
a sense of regret that he is obliged to ‘bring this matter up’
before the person being reproved.

That old Bible declares repeatedly
that the Christian is to judge “righteous judgment” – that is,
he is to discern the nature of men and women
in the same way as he discerns the type of a tree:
look at the fruit that the tree brings forth.

The talk that comes from the mouth of a man,
is the substance that is in the heart of that man.

If the general talk is vicious, so is the man.

According to the Bible, there is but one type of person
who is ever taught of God:

a man or woman of “… a contrite and humble spirit”
who “trembleth at my word.” Isaiah 57.15, 66.2

John Owen was chaplain to Oliver Cromwell:

“Whatever the parts or abilities of men,
whatever diligence they may use
in the investigation of the truth,

whatever disciplinary knowledge they may attain thereby,
the Spirit of God never did, nor ever will,
instruct a proud, unhumbled soul
in the right knowledge of the Scripture,
as it is a divine revelation.” [ Owen, 4, 186 ]

When a man is loud, bold, and brazen
to degrade others,
he is No man who is called … of God.

A man who is ruled by vanity will be INcapable
of receiving instruction.

Show them their error ever so clearly,
yet they have not the humility to learn.

“… the especial promise of God
is to teach the meek and the humble,
there is nothing that sets men
at a greater distance from divine instruction,
than a proud conceit of their own wisdom, wit,
parts, and abilities.” [ Owen ]

A man possessed of humility will genuinely be ashamed
for his error, his petulance, his ego.

It is no hardship for a meek and humble man to say:

“I was wrong … I can see that I allowed vanity and pride
to get the better of me. I was wrong. And I am sorry.”

And should that happen,
I shall be the first to extend the hand of friendship.

( Of course, you will forgive me for believing that
any man who has not the mental capacity
to read Arthur Pink, has neither the discipline
nor intellectual capacity to read John Owen
or the weightier Puritans – Let him pretend
to the contrary all he will. )

A (genuine) Christian man is always
looking for sin in himself;
he always worries about offending God;
he will be worried that selfishness or arrogance
in his speech or conduct, was displayed
to the world at large.

The Impostor will offer excuses.

Where there is No such tender conscience,
there is No ( what in biblical terms is designated )
“saving grace”.

The Christian profession is saturated with malicious,
evil creatures who use the availability of trusting souls,
as an opportunity to domineer, and feed their vanity.

Those who assert that a Christian MUST subject himself
to be ruled by the leaders of the Sunday-morning get-together

that is populated with Christians, hypocrites,
and moral atheists,
and there, place himself under their control …

… are insisting that a Christian abandon his intellect,
his common sense, and his conscience.

Which is precisely the hallmark of every cult,
and every tyrannical cult leader.

NO WHERE does the Bible command anyone
to dispense with discernment, and submit to every charlatan
who has been placed … BY MEN … into a religious office.

The old Bible specifically WARNS that evil arises
from WITHIN the visible, so-called ‘church’:

“… false teachers AMONG YOU who privily
shall bring in damnable heresies …”

“… grievous wolves enter in among you …
OF YOUR OWN SELVES shall men arise,
speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.”

As one progresses in years with such people,
it becomes evident that SELF INTEREST is the foundation
and cause of the “faith” of the greater part of professed ‘Christians’.

[ Many are called or, attracted; yet few are chosen ]

Puritan Thomas Manton noted no less in his day –

“All the scoffers at godliness WITHIN the pale
of the visible church pretend to believe in the same God,
and Christ – which they own with those whom THEY OPPRESS:

… The beginning, progress, and end of their course
is from themselves, and to themselves.

They … will neither admit information of their error,
nor reformation of their practice,
till death destroy them.”

Show a righteous man his disgraceful conduct,
and he WILL be ashamed.

Show a bully, and he will make excuse.

When I now take a teacup from the shelf,
I look at it, to see if it is sound.

Do the same for men.
The biblical admonition will do just fine:

Then shall ye return and DISCERN
between the righteous and the wicked,
between him that serveth God
and him that serveth him not. [ Malachi 3:18 ]

Seek no familiarity with those who are
loud, frivolous, and cocksure of themselves.

Look for those who are discerning,
and humble, and meek –
and seek company with them.

P Livingstone

[ Continued in Part 2 … Arthur Pink in his Own Words ]