I've done it again!

It is some time since I have had anything new to add to my C.V.!!! However, having been banned from commenting, reacting, posting good wishes to Facebook friends who were celebrating their birthdays, or even responding to personal messages for, this time, a seven day period, I feel that I may now include that particular accolade! At least, this time, I know that I am in good company! David Robertson has reported that no less a personage than Prof. Donald Macleod, former professor of Systematic Theology at the Free Church College, Edinburgh, and Principal for more than ten years, had also been banned! David also mentioned in last week's Quantum ("The Wee Flea podcast"), that Google and Apple had banned an 'app' because it cited John 3:16 and was "of no lasting value"! So much for the "free speech" for which most 'western' countries were, at one time, well-known.

As far as Facebook is concerned, Prof. Macleod had the temerity to voice some sympathy for Rev. Richard Cameron, minister of Scotstoun Parish Church, in Glasgow who, himself, has been suspended from his pastoral and parochial duties, by the Church of Scotland, for having publicly asked Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the UK Labour Party, "Who's going to be the first terrorist invited to the Commons when you're Prime Minister?" Given Mr Corbyn's well-publicised links with a number of terrorist movements, this does not seem, to me, to be an unreasonable question to ask. Thankfully, I do not believe that Mr Corbyn will ever enter 10 Downing Street as its tenant!

The Professor went on to state: "I am perfectly happy to let the LGBT community have their say. I am not happy that they should have a jealously-guarded right to monopolise the discourse, and I'm certainly not happy to concede the new dogma that the only wickedness is to question LGBT-ism. Christians, too, must have their say, and people should not lose their jobs because they are weak or off-message on such issues as homosexuality, bi-sexuality, trans-sexuality, or transgenderism." 

He continues: "Nor should we close our eyes and ears to where the gagging is actually leading. For example:

• If you are known to have reservations about the chosen lifestyle of LGBTs, you will not be allowed to be a teacher, a social worker, a parish minister, or a university professor.
• You will be barred from serving as a Member of Parliament, a Member of the Scottish Parliament, a local Councillor, or a member of the Judiciary.
• You will be ineligible for selection as an international sportsman (or, indeed, from participation in professional sport at any level).
• You will never secure employment with any charity.
• You'll never get a job with the BBC."

Please note that the Professor is not claiming that these conditions currently exist. Only that they are the almost inevitable outcome of the direction in which we are travelling. His complete article is well worth reading, and may be accessed at https://www.donaldmacleod.org.uk/dm/new-blog-post-4/  (copy and paste).

For myself, I again commented, critically, on a report regarding the 'marriage' of adult Muslim males - some very old indeed - to children as young as six years of age, and the particular reported comment by an imam that the hot weather made it more acceptable! The terms I used were terms that I have used many times before, without any comeback. However, this time ... ... !!!

Part of my reason for commenting was my (totally appropriate!) love for children, and my desire to protect them from any harm. This "child marriage" situation fills me with disgust, and I would cheerfully castrate any male (the word "man" does not seem, to me, to be appropriate) who wished to assault a child in this way. Just a few weeks ago there was a report of a girl of six, or eight, years of age who had died from internal bleeding caused by the penetrative sexual intercourse to which her adult "husband" had submitted her on their wedding night! I am, by both nature and belief, a non-violent person. However, give me 30 mins with that murderer ... ... !!!

It may be that Facebook will place a permanent ban on me, at some time. Not a problem - I shall then open a new account! However, it is sad that one cannot speak freely because these censors are checking every word we type. However, I'm back for the time being. Apologies, again, for having missed so much, and so many. I shall try to be a slightly better boy for the foreseeable future (but no promises!).

Information, Education, Entertainment.

Listening to the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, this morning, I was informed that the latest Director-General of the organisation, Lord Tony Hall, was announcing that he wanted to see changes in the Corporation.  He wanted, I was assured, to return to the days of "information, education, and entertainment."

All very well and good.  However, I do wonder who will be keeping an eye on the custodians of British Broadcasting?  "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" as the Roman poet and satirist, Juvenal, asks in his Satires.  I regret that a lot of the 'information' that I receive from the BBC is not worth the time spent listening to it.  The questions that are asked by journalists often seem to be nothing other than time-fillers.  Politicians, in particular, appear to be unable to give a straight answer to a straight question.  They have their 'Party-piece' prepared, and that is what they are going to say - that, and nothing else!  This morning, Danny Alexander, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, was asked repeatedly why he thought that UK house prices were so far above the former standard of 3.5 times annual salaries.  Perhaps I dozed off (I didn't!) but I am still awaiting his answer.  However, I think it was three times that we were informed that the Coalition Government's "Help to Buy" scheme would assist those who were able to afford mortgage repayments, but who couldn't save the required deposit,and didn't have wealthy parents to help them out (unlike, it seem, most of those in senior political positions!).  So much for information!  I would also mention that one has to be careful when listening to news and current affairs, programmes.  sadly, even the BBC is rarely neutral in its stance!

So, what about education?  There are, I would claim, some good educational programmes broadcast by the BBC on both radio and television.  Regretfully, they take up a relatively small spot on the 24/7 broadcasting schedule, and many of them are broadcast at what may be referred to as "unsociable hours".  Of course I am aware that most homes have recording devices, and much is available on iPlayer.  However, I doubt that I am the only person in the country who prefers to watch/listen to initial broadcasts.  I would also claim that a fair percentage of "educational" programming is either Open University, or travelogue documentaries.

That leaves us with entertainment.  It's a somewhat subjective word.  One man's humour is another man's boredom.  I know that when I hear clips from the average 'stand-up comedian', I am less than impressed!  I tend not to find most of the 'soaps' and their ilk to be particularly entertaining.  "Reality shows" are, to me, anathema; while watching people cook, with hair (and, in some cases, beard!) flowing all over the place offends me greatly on a professional basis.  Perhaps it's an age thing, but it seems to me that some of the 'oldies' can still entertain more than the 'modern' offerings.

So what will be different under the new D-G?  I would respectfully suggest to his Lordship that he go back to the inscription that was placed above the entrance of the original Broadcasting House.  It read: "This temple of the arts and muses is dedicated to Almighty God by the first Governors in the year of our Lord 1931, John Reith being Director-General. And they pray that good seed sown may bring forth good harvest, and that all things foul or hostile to peace may be banished thence, and that the people inclining their ear to whatsoever things are lovely and honest, whatsoever things are of good report, may tread the path of virtue and wisdom." (emphasis added).

Now, that would make a real difference to both programming, and to its overall effect on the nation!

They're only Christians!

I telephoned the BBC this evening (Monday)!  It's not something that I do with any frequency, but I was - to say the least - very angry!

Watching the 6 o'clock T.V. News, I was provided with further information about the dreadful attack, in Nairobi, Kenya, when members of the militant Somali, al Qaeda-linked, Islamist Group al Shabaab ("the lads"!) launched their indiscriminate attack on shoppers in a mall, that resulted in, the deaths of at least 62 people and the wounding of over 200 others, since the brutal attack began on Saturday.  In common, I would hope,with all right-minded people, my heart goes out to the bereaved and the injured, and I trust that both the Kenyan and Somalian governments deal quickly with one of the most ruthless of all of the Islamist terrorist groups operating in these days.

However, the very next item on the programme concerned the, as yet unfounded, charges made against entertainer, Rolf Harris!  In vain, I waited to be informed of the latest news of an even greater terrorist atrocity.  At least 83 people were murdered in a double suicide bombing at All Saints Church in Peshawar, Pakistan.  Around 130 people were wounded, some of them critically.  Many of those killed and injured were children.  The Pakistani Taliban (Islamist) claimed responsibility for the attack, stating that: "They [Christians] are the enemies of Islam, therefore we target them. We will continue our attacks on non-Muslims on Pakistani land."

In Kenya, the attack took place in what has been described as a popular upmarket shopping mall. Indeed, Westgate Shopping Centre described itself as Nairobi's premier shopping mall - a "first world interior"… " where local and international shoppers feel at home". Its 80 stores included Adidas, Nike, pizza restaurants and the four floors (350,000 sq feet) centred around a waterfall. It is, according to some news reports, where the affluent of Kenyan society are to be seen - both the indigenous population, and international visitors.

By contrast, All Saints Church served a congregation of fairly ordinary Pakistani believers - indeed, many of them were reportedly receiving a free meal in the grounds of the church building when the cowardly attack took place.

Could it be that the media are simply less concerned about those who were targeted because of their religious beliefs, than with those who were caught up in an attack because they were out buying designer clothing, and purchasing 'western' fast food?

Thank God, that He is concerned with each and every one of us.  "For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God sent the Son into the world, not to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the Name of the only Son of God." (John 3:16-18)

The truth will out!!

In an interview for a research project at the University of Oxford, the head of the BBC, Mark Thompson, has admitted that the broadcaster would never mock Mohammed like it mocks Jesus.

He justified the astonishing admission of religious bias by suggesting that mocking Mohammed might have the “emotional force” of “grotesque child pornography”.

But Jesus is fair game because, he said, Christianity has broad shoulders and fewer ties to ethnicity.

Mr Thompson says the BBC would never have broadcast Jerry Springer The Opera – a controversial musical that mocked Jesus – if its target had been Mohammed.

Mr Thompson said: “The point is that for a Muslim, a depiction, particularly a comic or demeaning depiction, of the Prophet Mohammed might have the emotional force of a piece of grotesque child pornography.”

Last year former BBC news anchor Peter Sissons said Christians are “fair game” for insults at the corporation, whilst Muslims must not be offended.

Mr Sissons, whose memoirs were serialised in the Daily Mail, said: “Islam must not be offended at any price, although Christians are fair game because they do nothing about it if they are offended.”

The former presenter also said that staff damage their careers if they don’t follow the BBC’s mindset.

Whatever happened to accuracy?

Tomorrow evening sees the commemncement of a 4-part series on the Nativity, being screened by the BBC.  This mini-series, by Eastenders writer, Tony Jordan, has been widely flagged up as a modern, but accurate, take on the original record.  From what I have heard and read thus far, I beg to differ as to the second of those adjectives!

I have posted the following on an online forum, but add it to this blog in order to give it a wider audience!

Having listened to Mr Jordan being interviewed on the Sunday programme on BBC Radio 4, this morning, I have already written to point out that the research that he claimed to have done has been woefully inadequate. An article in today's Sunday Express newspaper merely emphasises why the gentleman writes scripts for Eastenders, and not academic articles!

Permit me to put him (and any readers who may be foolish enough to take his word on matters about which, by his own confession, he knew very little before writing the forthcoming programmes) right on some of his mistakes and misconceptions (no pun intended!).

1. The suggestion that Joseph would have verbally abused the young Mary (more likely to have been 12-13 years old, in accordance with the contemporary culture) is flatly contradicted by the internal evidence of the Gospel record: "This is how Jesus the Messiah was born. His mother, Mary, was engaged to be married to Joseph. But before the marriage took place, while she was still a virgin, she became pregnant through the power of the Holy Spirit. Joseph, her fiancé, was a good man and did not want to disgrace her publicly, so he decided to break the engagement quietly.
As he considered this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream. 'Joseph, son of David,' the angel said, 'do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife. For the Child within her was conceived by the Holy Spirit. And she will have a Son, and you are to name Him Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.' ... When Joseph woke up, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded and took Mary as his wife. But he did not have sexual relations with her until her Son was born. And Joseph named Him Jesus." (Matt 1:18-25; NLT).

2. “I think it perfectly believable that Joseph should get angry with his betrothed and only agree to take her with him to Bethlehem when she risks being stoned by angry neighbours." Mr Jordan is entitled to 'think' whatever he wishes, but the fact is that Joseph would have been expected to take his wife with him for the census, especially when she was heavily pregnant so that both she and the child that was due to be born could be counted.

3. I did like Mr Jordan's reported protestation that “Personally, I believe in the immaculate conception ..."  Did his extensive research not throw up the fact that the immaculate conception is a doctrine of the Church of Rome that states that, in order for Mary to have been the mother of the Saviour, she herself had to be born sinless? It has nothing to do with the virginal conception of Jesus and, in fact, has no Biblical basis whatsoever!

4. One final point (although I could go on!). Mr Jordan states that "... those who wrote the gospels were doing so from a distance of 200 years." At least, this morning, he only allowed a gap of 100-150 years! However, he might have done a little bit more research and discovered, for example, the existence of the Magdalen Fragments. These are three pieces of papyrus containing parts of Matthew 26, and they are held, as far as I know, in Magdalen College, Oxford. They have been dated as from before 60AD - considerably earlier than Mr Jordan's conclusion! There is, of course, a great deal more evidence for the early writing of the whole of the New Testament.

If this article, and this morning's interview, are the best that Mr Jordan can do, then he has, in my opinion, a great deal to learn about the reality of the CHRISTmas story!