Concert carnage.

It is rare for me to comment in the immediate aftermath of an incident, but I am making this post one of those exceptions.

The latest reports that I have read have stated that 22 people - including children - died as a result of the "suicide bombing" at the end of a concert in Manchester. Accounts of the injuries sustained by many more would suggest that that number may well rise in the next few days.

How does one react to such an atrocity - apparently planned over a number of weeks? One can bring pious platitudes - but they seldom have any positive effect. One may rant and rave - but anger seldom has any positive effect either. One may turn away, simply relieved that one was not personally involved - but that, to me, would be a display of callousness.

It would appear, from reports, that the first problem was inadequate security precautions at the venue. many have complained - sadly, too late - that they were not properly searched; that bags were not even checked. This is, most assuredly, a major factor in such a situation. These large venues need to ensure that their patrons are as safe as is humanly possible - especially when groups such as Daesh (aka ISIS) have made no secret of their intention to inflict mayhem in "western" countries.

Of course, the situation is made easier for the terrorists when we permit a claimed 3,900 who were involved in the conflict in Syria, to return to the UK with no more than "a watchful eye" being kept on them! With numbers like that, it is no surprise that many "slip through the net"!

Another problem is that of the so-called "moderate Muslim". It is reported that "The Muslim Council of Britain said the Manchester attack was “horrific” and “criminal”. Secretary general Harun Khan said: “May the perpetrators face the full weight of justice both in this life and the next." However, what many decide to ignore is that the terrorists are the true Muslims! Since its founding by the false, paedophile "prophet", Muhammad, the aim of Islam has been the world-wide Caliphate - the whole world under the control of Islam, and under the restrictions of shariah (Islamic Law), by military force where that is deemed to be necessary. So how do the so-called "moderate" Muslims fit in with this, in the light of their pious-sounding comments? They are simply following the example of their founder. It is called "taqiyya" and is the deliberate deception of the infidels (that's all of us who do not profess to be Muslims) in order to further the expansion of Islam and the attainment of that final goal - that world-wide Caliphate.

How then should we infidels - and especially Jews and Biblical Christians - react? We should certainly not shun any Muslims we know. Rather, we should seek to win them over from what is, I firmly believe, a satanic cult. That is not easy - yet there are reports, from many parts of the world, of hundreds, even thousands, of Muslims turning to the Lord Jesus for salvation. We who believe in the power of prayer must engage in that particular activity, faithfully and fervently. However, we must also remember the words of Jesus that His followers be "wise as serpents [whilst being ] harmless as doves." (Mt.10:16). The first is every bit as important as the second.

The government, also, has a major part to play. One of the first responsibilities of any government is the safety and welfare of the people it governs. Under the Terrorism Act 2000, the police have extensive powers. Using these powers, people can be detained for up to nine hours, with DNA samples and fingerprints taken, without the need for any reasonable suspicion. If it is considered to be necessary, police may also detain and search an individual, with the aim of determining whether, or not, that person appears to be someone who is or has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

However, the latest quarterly Home Office report on the use of police powers under the Terrorism Act, which was released in March, shows that there has been a decrease in the use of these powers. This, it has been claimed, is due to pressure from groups like Stop Watch, which argues that they infringe the human rights of Muslims and other communities.

It is my personal opinion, that enough has been done to pander to the alleged "rights" of, particularly, the Muslim community. Those 22 young people and children who were so callously murdered last night, surely had some right to life! However, that right was over-ridden by one man's desire to kill and maim in the name of Islam!

I pray for those who have been bereaved; I pray for those who have been injured; I pray for those who have been traumatised; I pray for the members of the Emergency Services who responded so quickly and so competently. I pray, too, for the perpetrators of all such deeds, in the UK, in France, in other parts of the world; that they may yet be saved by the only blood that was ever shed that has a lasting, and positive, affect - the blood of Jesus the Christ, on the cross at Calvary. In Him, and in Him alone, is found salvation, and the forgiveness of sin. And one doesn't have to be an Islamic terrorist to need all of that!

So - what IS a "Christian"?

It was a headline in an online newspaper that first caught my eye: "A third of French ISIS fighters were born CHRISTIAN and converted to Islam, expert reveals." (emphasis in the original).

My first thought was, of course, that no-one is "born a Christian".  That, as Jesus pointed out very clearly to Nicodemus, requires that one be "born again"! (See John 3).  My second thought, coming from a Christian perspective, was that no-one is "converted" to Islam. If anything, one would be PERverted to that particular ideology.

So, what is a Christian?  Well, I am not the only preacher to have preached on that question - and on more than one occasion!  I could give a list of criteria that would define a Christian, in Biblical terms - and anything else is, at best, suspect!  My idea was to share some of the points that I have made, in the past, in this post.

Then I read today's 'Daily Article' by Dr Jim Denison - whom I have quoted before in this blog. In it, he refers to a couple who appear on American television.  He states that "Their HGTV show, Fixer Upper, is one of the most popular shows on the network. They are smart, funny, and entertaining. And the good they do in helping couples renovate houses into homes is terrific." We are informed, however, that this couple are "Christians" - and when Jim Denison uses the term, he knows exactly what he means!  He tells us that a reporter from a particular publication asked this couple where they stood on the issue of same-gender "marriage" (my quotation marks), and whether or not they would ever feature a same-gender couple on their show.    

The reporter then turned her attention to the Fellowship of which this couple are a part, carefully editing a sermon by the pastor that he preached on the Sunday after the USoA Supreme Court had declared that same-gender "marriage" was to be legal in all fifty States of the Union. (Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are all officially Commonwealths, but are counted as States for all administrative purposes!).

Now you may be wondering what has all of this to do with the question "What is a Christian?"? Well, Jim Denison makes the point that "Christians facing persecution is an escalating theme today." and, while he readily concedes that "... it is unfair to compare believers facing execution and/or confiscation of their churches and property with believers being ridiculed for their biblical beliefs regarding marriage.", he also concludes that "What the two kinds of persecution have in common is that both intend to pressure Christians to change their convictions."

That, as I read it, gave me a clue to the answer to my question. What is a Christian? A Christian is one who puts Jesus first - every time, in every situation, in every place. I recalled those young Egyptian Coptic Christians, murdered on a Libyan beach simply because they were faithful followers of Jesus. It was reported that they had the opportunity to deny Jesus, and recite the shahadah (the basic Islamic creed). Each one refused, even although they knew that it might be the means of saving their lives. I think of a Pakistani Christian named Asia, who has now spent about seven years in prison because she had the temerity to offer a cup of water to a fellow-worker in the fields, on a hot day. That fellow-worker was a Muslim - and was so offended by this, that Asia was reported under the "Blasphemy Laws" of Pakistan, and sentenced to death! She has been given many opportunities to become a Muslim, and be set free - but she has steadfastly refused to do so.

I wonder where you, and I, if we claim to be disciples of Jesus, stand in our faithfulness to Him? The anonymous (human) author of the Letter to Hebrew disciples of Jesus writes: "Consider Him Who endured from sinners such hostility against Himself, so that you may not grow weary or fainthearted. In your struggle against sin you have not yet resisted to the point of shedding your blood." (Heb 12:3-4; emphasis added). I wonder if, with the knife-blade of a fanatic already at my throat, I would be as faithful as those young Copts.  I wonder if, after about seven years in prison, in solitary confinement for my own safety, I would still be faithful to the Lord Jesus. I trust that I would - and believe that, if I were to be in any such situation, I would indeed receive the grace that I needed to remember to "... take the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand." (Eph 6:13).

Let us never forget those who, on a daily basis, are indeed called upon to show that they are truly His. Let us pray that we, who enjoy so much relative ease in the "west", will be likewise faithful if, and when, real persecution comes to us!

POTUS

For those who may be unfamiliar with the acronym, it stands for "President of the United States". This office is generally recognised as being the most influential in the "free" world - which is why so many, outwith the USoA, are so interested in its holder.

After a Facebook entry, there were those who concluded that I was a supporter of Donald Trump. That was not, strictly speaking, true.  It just happens to be the case that I am vehemently opposed to Hillary Clinton - and there isn't really any other choice. Apart from the sudden death of one of them, or some major divine intervention, either Trump or Clinton will be declared to be the 45th POTUS on Nov.9th, 2016.

I, of course, do not have a vote in this presidential election.  However, many of those who read this blog do have such a vote. I wish to provide three reasons why, if I did have a vote, I would be casting it in favour of Donald Trump!

First of all, let me make clear that I do not hold Donald Trump in very high esteem. He has shown himself, over and over again, to be boorish; loud-mouthed; amoral (if not immoral); and totally lacking in public speaking ability.  In almost any other situation, he would not receive one iota of support from me.

Having said that - and this is one reason for voting for him - he is not in anyone's pocket. As far as I know, he inherited his business empire from his father, but it has made him a very rich individual, who has provided the greater part of the financial support for his campaign.  This means that he is not beholden to anyone; he would not have to dish out "favours" to financial backers; he would have a level of independence that no POTUS had enjoyed for a very long time.  

His competitor, on the other hand, has been the recipient of millions of dollars in support from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates, to name just three.  Now, of course, Clinton is not so stupid as to have these amounts paid directly into her campaign fund!  Oh no!  They are paid into the Clinton Foundation - an organisation that, as far as I can make out, is run by the Clintons, for the Clintons!  Not that Clinton rejects financial support for her campaign, from Islamic donors. According to the Middle East Forum’s “Islamist Money in Politics” (IMIP) project, which has released the names of the top-ten recipients of 2015-16 campaign contributions from individuals who subscribe to the same Islamic supremacism as Khomeini, bin Laden, and ISIS, Clinton is at the top, raking in $41,165 from prominent Islamists. This includes $19,249 from senior officials of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), declared a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates on November 15, 2014.  (For full details of all Islamist contributions, click here… http://www.islamist-watch.org/money-politics/recipient/141/).  Does any sensible person think that these "donations" all come without any "strings" attached?!

The second reason why I would vote for Trump is his choice running-mate - the man who, in the event that Trump wins, would be the Vice-President, and the man who would take over if the President should die - however that might happen.  This man is Mike Pence, currently Governor of Indiana, and a sincere disciple of Jesus. Indeed, he appears to be many of the things that Trump is not - which would make him a good "counter-balance" to any wild ideas that the new President might seek to introduce.  He is a qualified attorney and has experience in government at Congressional level.  He opposes - as does Trump - the late-term, and partial-birth abortion procedures that Clinton supports.  Indeed, Clinton's relationship with "Planned Parenthood" should make anyone who seeks to follow the teaching of the One Who said "Allow the little children to come to me" very concerned indeed.  If you are unsure as to what is involved in these particular procedures, do take time to check them out!  Clinton's choice of running-mate is a man who agrees with her on such matters.

The third reason I would offer for voting for Trump is that he is not a "career politician".  He has never held public office before, at any level.  All of the criticisms that are levelled at him are of things that he said, and allegedly did, as a private citizen.  That does no make any of them acceptable - but we, quite rightly, demand a higher standard of behaviour from our elected representatives.  I suspect that, if elected, and with a good VP, Donald Trump could surprise a lot of people!

I could go on - Trump has never, as far as I know, been charged with the leaking of state secrets.  He has never boasted about getting a self-confessed rapist of a young teenager "off the hook"!  His physical health appears to be good - unlike Clinton's.  He certainly hasn't been accused of having an ear-piece during national debates - a means of having answers and information fed in from some back room!  He also has a nice sense of humorous timing.  I think that my favourite moment in the debates was when Clinton made some comment asking what would happen of Trump was in charge of the legal system. His instant response: "You would be in jail." was classic!

As a disciple of Jesus, I believe firmly that God is in control, and that nothing can, or will, happen on this earth without His knowledge, and permission. If Clinton emerges as the victor in this presidential race, I will see that as a judgement on the government and people of the USoA.  I trust that they will be spared such a judgement - and that Donald Trump, with all of his faults and failings, will be the next POTUS.

BREXIT - or remain? Immigration.

I was unable to watch all of last evening's Newsnight programme on BBC television, but I managed to watch some, and have read a number of comments since.  It was, as is not uncommon at the present time, a disgrace.  The "I'm not sure what I identify as", allegedly comedian, Eddie Izzard appeared in the most bizarre outfit - looking, as others have pointed out, like Vera Duckworth from Coronation Street! However, it appeared that he was there for the prime purpose of interrupting, and shouting over, Nigel Farage, beside whom the "unbiased" (believe that if you will!) BBC had seated him/her/it.  Mr Dumbleby was, as usual, about as useful as the proverbial chocolate tea-pot as far as keeping order was concerned!

The major bone of contention between them was on the subject of immigration, and the way in which the UK being a member of the EU has effected it.  Nigel Farage claimed - and he is rarely, if ever, wrong in such claims (unlike Izzard, and most of the "Remain" politicians, he does his homework!) - that some 70% of the UK population want tighter controls on immigration.  So what are the relevant facts on that topic?

1. The EU is being flooded with immigrants - especially since Angela Merkel kindly opened the door to all and sundry!  Now please don't make the mistake, that Izzard and others make, of assuming that the Brexit supporters are totally opposed to any immigration at all.  What is demanded is controlled immigration, which is a totally different kettle of fish.

2. It is estimated that some 5,000 ( a conservative figure!) of those who have entered the EU since the Merkel invitation, are members of ISIS.  One does not require an IQ of 160+ to work out why they are taking advantage of this lovely "open doors" policy!

3. Members of other EU states are flooding the UK, claiming millions of pounds in benefits - and even having Child Benefit Allowance sent to their native countries with, as far as I am aware, not even an attempt to check as to whether, or not, those children even exist.

4. Immigrants from EU countries (yes, I know that non-EU immigrants are part of this problem as well, but that is a separate issue - although one that would also be able to be dealt with more easily if we were, once again, an independent sovereign nation) are already putting enormous pressure on public services: NHS; schools; social housing; transport; etc

5. If (or ought that to be "When"?) Turkey is offered visa-free travel within the EU as part of its move towards full membership, another 78 million potential immigrants who would have to be accepted under EU rules.  Even if a mere 1% were to travel, that is still approximately 780,000!  By the way, no-one expects that the percentage will be anything lie as low as 1%!

Those are just five immigration-related reasons to vote LEAVE on June 23rd.  There are, undoubtedly, others.  However, in my opinion, those five are more than sufficient!

ISIS v. Israel

No, the title is not suggesting that this post has to do with a direct confrontation between ISIS (aka Daesh) and the nation of Israel.  I suspect that any unbiased writer would have no difficulty in predicting the outcome of such a conflict!  (Clue: Israel would not come out of it as second-best!!).

However, in the last couple of days, I have viewed two specific photographs that clearly display the difference between these two entities.  The first has also appeared in today's online Daily Express.

The executioner is in the act of beheading a 15 year-old boy - in front of a large crowd, including many teenagers.  Ayham Hussein was handed the death sentence after being tried in a strict Sharia law court.   ISIS thugs had found the teenager listening to a portable compact disc player inside his dad's shop in an open-air market in western Mosul, in Iraq.  Sentenced to death - for listening to music!  No words of mine could ever suitably describe such an act!  Those responsible will, in eternity, if not before, answer for such a crime - because their's was the crime; the boy was innocent of any crime - certainly in any civilised society.

The second picture was e-mailed to me from the Scottish Friends of Israel.

In his short life, Mohammed al-Farra has known just one home: the yellow-painted children's ward in Israel's Tel Hashomer hospital.  Born in Gaza with a rare genetic disease, Mohammed's hands and feet were amputated because of complications from his condition, and the 3½ year-old moves about in a tiny red wheelchair. His parents abandoned him, and the Palestinian government won't pay for his care, so he lives at the hospital with his grandfather.  

Mohammed was rushed to Israel as a newborn for emergency treatment. His genetic disorder left him with a weakened immune system and crippled his bowels, doctors say, and an infection destroyed his hands and feet, requiring them to be amputated.   In the midst of his treatment, his mother abandoned Mohammed because her husband, ashamed of their son, threatened to take a second wife if she didn't leave the baby and return to their home in the southern Gaza Strip town of Khan Younis, al-Farra said. In Gaza, polygamy is permitted but isn't common. But it's a powerful threat to women fearful of competing against newer wives.  Now Mohammed spends his days undergoing treatment and learning how to use prosthetic limbs, while his 55-year-old grandfather cares for him. Mohammed's Israeli doctors, who've grown attached to the boy, fund-raise to cover his bills, allowing him and his grandfather to live in the sunny pediatric ward.

Two children; two cultures; two situations; two outcomes.   For ISIS/Daesh, death for listening to music; for another Arab Muslim boy, life because of the dedication, love, and concern, of Israel and its medical staff.

Such stories could, of course, be multiplied many times over.  Sadly, although ISIS/Daesh do have their evil actions publicised, you will rarely find the "western" media informing people of the situation of children such as Mohammed al-Farra.  To do so, of course, might cause the unthinking among us to realise that the bias against the State and Nation of Israel is unfounded.

I believe, as a disciple of Jesus of Nazareth - Himself born and raised as a Jew; tried and falsely convicted, as a Jew; crucified as King of the Jews (in accordance with prophecy: see Isaiah 53) - I have a moral, and even spiritual, obligation to support Israel.  I may not agree with every policy decision of the Israeli government (although I would gladly exchange the current incumbent of 10 Downing Street, for Mr Netanyahu!) but, as Corrie ten Boom's father reminded her at the time of the Holocaust: "They are still the apple of His eye"! (see Deut.32:10; Ps.17:8; Zech.2:8 - the reference is to the keen sensibility of the eye, and denotes the careful protection, and security, of Almighty God - HaShem).

If you have a heart for Israel, please do all that you can to publicise the truth and, of course, pray for the peace of Jerusalem - Sh’alu shalom yerushalayim.

Postscript to 9/11.

No, not the tragic events of September 11th, 2001, but the post that I published here on September 11th, this year!  For some reason (I would be grateful if anyone could e-mail me with a solution - please use the e-mail address above), this blog no longer seems to accept comments, and has not done so for a considerable length of time.  This means that there were no comments directly to the blog.  However, I made the same point on a number of Facebook pages, and was castigated (albeit, mildly!) for my lack of compassion.  At least one brother in the Lord has been treated in much the same way for having made similar points.

However, the news reports that Daesh (aka ISIS) are crucifying thousands in Syria surely makes it clear that, as I have stated often, compassion must be tempered with discernment.  Daesh have made no secret of their willingness to 'use' the genuine refugees as a 'cover' for them to infiltrate Western Europe.  They will, undoubtedly, claim to be Syrian Christians fleeing persecution in order to be welcomed by their intended victims.   This is, to Muslims, "taqiyya" - the use of deceit to gain an advantage over one's enemies.  Muhammad declared, as a justification for murdering unarmed prisoners after offering them safe passage, “war is deceit”. (from the Hadith - collected sayings of Muhammad).  

The tradition continues.  On May 10^th, 1994, just a few months after signing the Oslo Accords (September, 1993), the late Yasir Arafat addressed an assembly of Muslims in a Johannesburg mosque where he justified his actions by explaining: “This agreement, I am not considering it more than the agreement which had been signed between our prophet Muhammad and Quraysh.” And he concluded by calling on the worshipers “to come and to fight and to start the jihad to liberate Jerusalem.”

What did he mean?   He was referring to Muhammad having signed a 10-year truce with the Arabian pagan Quraysh tribe in the city of Mecca (the Treaty of Hudaybiyah, 628 AD). At the beginning of the second year of that ten-year period he found a pretext to justify breaking the truce. He pounced on the Quraysh in a surprise attack, conquered Mecca and defeated the Quraysh, who were not prepared for more hostilities since they were honoring the 10-year accord and assumed that Muhammad was too.  Since then this agreement between Muhammad and the Quraysh has been an example for Muslims world-wide of how to trick the enemy in wartime. In other words, Arafat explained to his Muslim audience that he gave his word to President Clinton and Yitzhak Rabin, and signed the Oslo Accords, only because he planned to annul his commitments and attack Israel as soon as it was expedient for him to do so.  He lied to Clinton and Rabin; but once he was out from under the scrutiny of western media and in the comfort of a Muslim group whose support he could assume, he told the truth to his Muslim audience.  Apparently, he was unaware that his speech was being recorded.

The desired policy of many of Europe's 'leaders' (Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán is an honourable exception!) of 'open doors' is, of course, simply playing into the hands of those terrorists who wish to make Western Europe part of a worldwide Caliphate - with its inhabitants given a simple choice to 'convert' to Islam; pay a special "subjugation" tax (the jizya); or die!

So - if we are disciples of Jesus, let us "Put on then, as God's chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, and patience, ..." (Col.3:12).   However, let us neither forget, nor ignore, the words of the Saviour: "... be wise as serpents and innocent as doves." (Matt.10:16).   Let us not be so insistent on being the latter, that we fail to be the former!

I am a 'Nasrani'.

Apparently, this is the Arabic letter 'N' - short for 'Nasrani': the Arabic word for Christian. It is reported that the al-Qaeda-inspired ISIS group (The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), that aims to establish an Islamic Caliphate throughout the Middle East, have spray-painted the Arabic letter on the homes of thousands of Iraqi Christians over the weekend in order to identify them.

An ultimatum, issued by ISIS militants, gave the few remaining Christians a stark choice: stay and convert, pay Islamic tax, or leave. "If they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword," the ISIS statement said.

Let it be known to one and all - I am a 'Nasrani'.

I've made up my mind - don't confuse me with the facts!

Humza Yousaf is not someone about whom I would normally post - or even want to post!  He is a List MSP (i.e. not elected by the people, but put in place by the party, in his case, the SNP).  He has a Facebook page which, when I was directed to it yesterday, allowed comments.  Today, it would appear that such a facility is no longer available!

Mr Yousaf is obviously a supporter of the so-called Palestinian people - not surprising given his own apparent ethnic background.  His Facebook page - from what I read of it - swings between informing us that the Palestinians are down-trodden refugees in their own land (okay, he doesn't use those precise words, but I write better prose than does he!), and telling us what a fine fellow he is as he junkets around at the expense of the tax-payer (well, he is a politician!).

Yesterday, I posted some comments, including two links to YouTube videos, that provided an alternative perspective of the current situation in Israel.  I also commented on a number of Mr Yousaf's earlier posts.  Today, I received notification that my comments had been removed, and it was when I checked this out (it is true!) that I discovered that I was unable to redo them.

This would suggest, to me, that Mr Yousaf is:

(a) too biased to permit another viewpoint to be aired;
(b) too cowardly to allow an alternative voice to be heard;
(c) too uneducated to provide a reasoned response;
(d) all of the above.

If Mr Youssaf is an example of the Parliamentarians in Holyrood, then a 'No' vote on September becomes an absolute necessity.  I certainly do not want biased, uneducated, cowards representing me in the Scottish Parliament! 

By the way, one of the two video clips was at:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/07/islamic-state-to-fifa-cancel-the-world-cup-or-well-bomb-it

(Apologies that the 'hot link' appears not to work - but 'copy and paste' seems to do the trick!) 

The other has been taken down by BBC World (possibly a copyright issue), but gave the lie to many of the 'reports' coming out of Gaza - with graphics that are from years ago, and some that are not even from Gaza!

If you hadn't heard it before, you heard it first here!!!!