Palm Sunday

It must have been an exciting, and memorable, occasion – that day on which Jesus of Nazareth, the Galilean Teacher, rode into the great city of Jerusalem, on the back of a donkey! Certainly, the evangelists, who have recorded the event for us, speak of great crowds; of cheering and rejoicing; of the Eastern custom, when a person of distinction is passing by, of strewing the road with the branches of trees, and with their cloaks. It was the first Palm Sunday!

Some, however, appear to have been unaware of the identity of the One Who was the centre of attention. For Matthew records that “… when He entered Jerusalem, all the city was stirred, saying ‘Who is this?’” (Matt.21:10)

“Who is this?” The answer given was that “This is the prophet, Jesus, from Nazareth in Galilee.” (v.11). However, that may be considered to have been a somewhat superficial response. There is, indeed, a much better, and timelessly relevant, answer. It is a question that, when directed at Jesus of Nazareth, becomes the most important question in the world; the most important question of all time!

There are, in the end, only three possible answers, and I hope to share each of them over three days of this Holy Week. The first answer is that He is a Liar! His own claim, both implicitly and explicitly, was that He was God. But if, when He made that claim He knew, consciously, that He was not God, then He was lying. And, if He was a liar, then He was also a hypocrite, because He taught others to be honest – whatever the personal cost might be – while Himself teaching, and living, and perpetrating, a colossal untruth.

More than that, He was a demon, a very devil, because He told others to trust in Him for their eternal destiny. But if He was unable to back up His claims, and was aware of that, then He was unspeakably evil.

And, of course, He would have been a fool, because it was this very claim – that He was God – that led to His crucifixion! (see Mark 14:61-64; John19:7).

If this is a liar, then He is also a hypocrite, a demon, a fool. But here is what one man has written: “How, in the name of logic, common-sense, and experience, could an imposter have invented, and consistently maintained from the beginning to the end, the purest and noblest character known in history, with the most perfect air of truth and reality?” (Philip Schaff; The Person of Christ, pps. 94-95). The unspoken answer is that he couldn’t!

Someone who lived as Jesus lived; taught as Jesus taught; and died as Jesus died; simply couldn’t have been a liar. I’ll offer a second suggestion in tomorrow’s post!

Not the Messiah!!!

Although I have another couple of posts from our few days away, the following - that was awaiting me when I logged in to my e-mails - would seem to be a priority matter, at least for those of us who love, and seek (however imperfectly) to honour the Lord Jesus.

CLASSIC FM PROMOTING 'NOT THE MESSIAH'

Classic FM are promoting the showing of the blasphemous 'Not the Messiah', on the Classic FM website and in trailers. 'Not the Messiah' is by Monty Python's Eric Idle. It is being screened in cinemas this Thursday (25th). It is a musical version of 'The Life of Brian' in which Brian gets mistaken for the real Messiah and is crucified. Well-meaning people will urge us to see it all as not about Christ but about Brian and to see the funny side.

But the film sponges off the life and sacrifice of Jesus Christ and this mock-oratorio parodies the glorious music of Handel's masterwork. It is even billed as 'a spoof of Handel's Messiah'. It has the song from 'Life of Brian' which 'Brian' sang while hanging from the cross, 'Always look on the bright side of life.' Crucifixion is not funny. It even has 'Hail to the Shoe' sung to the music of the Hallelujah Chorus. That isn't funny either.

While pretending 'Not the Messiah' is not blasphemous or offensive, Idle is well aware of what he is doing - mocking the Gospel of Jesus Christ. According to Eric Idle: "There is no controversy .. it's only people stupid enough to realise Christ is in the movie twice, and Christ isn't Christ, so there's no real controversy... It's very simple - you either get it or you don't."

But Eric Idle is an avowed atheist and a supporter and reader of both Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens. He has a song on Atheist Nexus: 'F*** Christmas'. This is a man with an agenda and a big anti-Christ chip on his shoulder. I think we get it. He is out to mock religion and people of faith; and it's a great pity that Classic FM has joined him, showing contempt for their Christian listeners.

It is worth taking a look at the LIBRETTO: The show opens with the words: 'The Book of Brian'. It then mocks the Biblical apocalypse, which it calls 'Apocalypso', blasphemes the Christian doctrines of the awesomeness of God and depravity of man, refers to 'The Evangelist Monty' - and we are still only on page 3 of a 22-page libretto. Instead of the shepherds glorifying God, they ask 'is it AD yet?' and sing about how much they love sheep. Take a look, and see if all you hold dear isn't being dragged through the mud, vilified and ridiculed.

EMI pulled the funding of a 2007 DVD release of 'The Life of Brian' after the CEO read the script. Classic FM should have kept well away from 'Not the Messiah' as well.

PRAY: that Classic FM will pull all the trailers and the competition they are running for this event. Pray that audiences will not turn up at the cinemas. Pray that atheist Eric Idle will repent and turn to the Christ he is mocking.

EMAIL: darren.henley@classicfm.com (Managing Director). Copy to requests@classicfm.com
Let Mr Henley know that his promotion of 'Not the Messiah' offends and insults you and Almighty God. If you are a regular listener, tell him so. Ask him to stop promoting it on Classic FM.

I have read the Libretto, and would wish to emphasise just two lines:

"Everyone reaps
The seeds they have sown" (p.14)

Mr Idle should take due notice of his own words - he will, eventually, discover their truth!

More on "total depravity"

The U.K. government’s Schools Secretary, Ed Balls (who, in my opinion, every time he opens his mouth, proves that he is one of the most accurately-named politicians in Westminster!) has come out with the statement that what the killers of Jamie Bulger “… did to James Bulger was evil, but I'm not willing to say the children were intrinsically evil”

This, of course, takes me back to a couple of days ago and Calvin’s doctrine of the total depravity of mankind. This doctrine does NOT teach that all of mankind is ‘totally depraved’; it teaches that ALL mankind (the totality thereof) is sinful.

This teaching comes straight from the written Word of God, the Bible. In Ps.51:5, David confesses that “Surely I was sinful at birth; sinful from the time my mother conceived me”, while in Ps.14:2-3 (repeated in 53:2-30) is the statement that “YHWH looks down from heaven on the sons of men to see if there are any who understand; any who seek God. All have turned aside; they have together become corrupt; there is no-one who does good, not even one.”

This theme is picked up in the New Testament – most clearly in Paul’s Letter to the disciples of Jesus, living in Rome, where he makes the simple, but profound, claim that “… all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23)

The simple fact of the matter is that I am not a sinner because I sin – I sin because I am a sinner! The sinfulness of Adam is inherited by all of his descendants. I have always found it interesting that one of the first words a small child uses is the word “No” – and disobedience is only a small step away from rebelliousness!

So, sorry Mr Balls, but you are talking a load of …! (you may insert your own name!).

However, the good news is that all is not lost. Paul continues, in v.24 of that 3^rd chapter of Romans: “…and are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.” This is simply making the point that salvation/justification is a work of God’s grace. Every single one of us needs it; not one of us can ever earn it; purchase it; deserve it.

Doubtless, Mr Balls, like me, has never been charged with, or found guilty of, a criminal offence. But we are both sinners from the moment of our conception – it’s in our genes – and we both need that salvation that comes only through the shed blood of the Lord Jesus, at Calvary.

You are what you eat - aren't you?

There may be some decisions that people make that effect only themselves - but they are few and far between! "No man is an island", said John Donne, and he was absolutely correct. Whether I like it or not, I am my brother's keeper! (see Gen.4:9).

Those thoughts came to me when I read, in today's newspaper, of Donna Simpson, a 42-year-old mother of two who is currently the world's fattest mother as recorded by the Guinness Book of Records. When, three years ago, she gave birth to her second child, she weighed in at more than 37 stones and, since then, she has managed to put almost 6 stones more! Her stated aim is to reach 1,000 pounds (just short of 72 stones!).

To pay for her food bill of some $750 (£450) per week, she has set up a web-site by which (sad) people pay to watch her eat, and wash.

So why shouldn't this woman gorge herself to such gross obesity? I think that her own body could do with some consideration. It certainly wasn't designed to carry that amount of excess weight around. Indeed, even the mobility scooter that she uses probably wasn't designed for such punishing use!

Then there are her children. The elder of the two, is reported as being 14 years of age. Has his mother ever given any consideration to what he might have to handle at school? Children can be notoriously cruel to one another, and this woman is providing plenty of ammunition. Additionally, her eating habits, and her weight, indicate that she will not live to see a ripe old age. I wonder has she given any consideration to the children who will be left without a mother?

Even her husband who, according to one report, likes large women (!!) must surely be concerned about the size of his wife, and wonder for how long he will have her with him.

And, of course, there are the taxpayers of her native New Jersey. They, I imagine, will be left to pick up the tab if/when her children need to be taken into care. Those sad people who have nothing better to do with their time and money than to watch her, and pay her for the 'privilege' are also effected - if only by having this opportunity to satisfy there own unusual desires!

In my opinion, this woman has serious psychological problems, and it is to be hoped that someone will step in and offer her the help that she so obviously needs. In a world in which thousands die of starvation every day, it is sad to see this one woman having such a strange goal in life! I wonder if she has ever read from Paul's letter to the disciples of Jesus in the Roman colonial city of Philippi: "Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is on earthly things." (3:19)?

The total depravity of man(kind)

This oft-misunderstood doctrine formulated by John Calvin in his magnum opus “The Institutes of the Christian Religion”, came to my mind this morning as I listened to the Saturday edition of the Radio 4 programme Today.

One item of news was the call by the Children’s Commissioner, Maggie Atkinson, to raise the age of criminal responsibility, in England, from 10 years to 12 years, or perhaps 14 years. This came on the back of the well-reported, and commented-upon case of the re-arrest of Jon Venables on unspecified, but apparently serious, charges (see below). Ms Atkinson is of the opinion that Jon Venables and his co-convicted Robert Thomson should not have been tried, as they were, for the callous murder of toddler Jamie Bulger.

Thankfully, in my opinion, the government have immediately rejected her call – and only a true cynic would suggest that this had anything at all to do with the fact that a General Election is only weeks away!!!

One reason for my thankfulness is that, in the same radio programme, a young man with learning difficulties – one of the most vulnerable groups in our society – was interviewed. He did not always express himself in the most articulate manner, but it was certainly clear that he and his girlfriend were the objects of much verbal abuse, ridicule, and harassment, from children who were as young as ten – and possibly even younger.

Of course, the real problem with children of this age group is the apparent lack of parental control – or even, in many cases, interest! Perhaps if parents were to be held fully responsible for their own children up until they reach the minimum school-leaving age, we could allow the age of criminal responsibility to be raised somewhat. Until then, I believe that the Scottish Government is making a mistake with its moves to raise the age to twelve, and that the rest of the U.K. would be ill-advised to make the same change.

The Biblical teaching: “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.” (Prov.22:6) still has much to commend it!

Jon Venables

I have deliberately held back from making any comment on the case of the reported re-arrest of Jon Venables – one of the two young boys who were convicted of the torture and murder of little Jamie Bulger, way back in 1993 – on charges connected with child pornography. However, I feel that it is now time for me to express my own opinion!

The first point that I find to be relevant is that this young man has allegedly broken the terms of his parole, and of his ‘new identity’, and done so on a number of occasions. Indeed, it has been widely reported that, under the influence of alcohol, he has revealed his true identity on more than one occasion!

The second point is that, whatever I may think of the original case; the sentence given; and the fact of the release of both boys when they reached the age of eighteen years; this is a totally separate offence. The British justice system does not, usually, permit a jury to know of the previous record of the defendant in a court case.

However, I am currently in the process of making my first attempt at writing a publishable book! If it ever reaches the shelves of your local Christian Bookshop, it will probably have the title: “Getting to know you – Great Words of the Christian Faith”. I have just completed my first draft of the chapter that will deal with the amazing concept of grace. It isn’t too difficult to write about it – it’s the practising of it that causes me problems. Yet, as I think about Jon Venables, I wonder what Jesus would do in this situation! How would He react to this young man who is guilty of a terrible crime, and who is alleged to have committed further criminal activity?

One of the illustrations that I was using, earlier this evening, is taken from John 8. It’s the record of the story of the woman, taken in the very act of adultery and, while adultery, for all its seriousness, pales somewhat in the light of the murder of a defenceless toddler, it was considered to be a much more serious sin in Jesus’ day than it most obviously is in our contemporary culture. Please read the full story for yourself. I only want to remind you of the words of Jesus to those who were the accusers of this woman: “Let the one who is without sin throw the first stone”! He then told the woman to “Go, and don’t commit that sin again.” An act of incomparable grace.

Perhaps those of us who, in our natural state, would see Jon Venables hung, drawn, and quartered, need to look first at ourselves, before we pronounce judgement on him. Is this to condone his crime? Of course not. But nothing that is done to him will bring back little Jamie Bulger. There is a difference between justice and revenge. I fear that too many seek the latter!

Richard Dawkins, and morality.

Believe it, or not, I feel almost sorry for Richard Dawkins - the prominent atheist/humanist (see the post for 21st Feb., 2010). It has been widely reported that he has closed down the forum on his own website (http://richarddawkins.net/) because he considers that some of the comments that had been posted on it were unacceptable/unsuitable - "irrelevant postings and frivolous gossip" will, apparently, no longer be allowed under a new regime of tight moderation.

It is also reported that Mr Dawkins responded to the fury that greeted his intimation of the forthcoming tighter control with the statement: "Imagine your face described by an anonymous poster as 'a slack-jawed t**d-in-the-mouth mug'. Surely there has to be something wrong with people who can resort to such over-the-top language."

"Surely there has to be something wrong ..." It may be that I have not fully understood Mr Dawkins' position but I am forced to ask "What is 'wrong'?" From where does he acquire his idea of 'wrong' and, one must presume, its antonym of 'right'?

I lifted down from my bookshelves, a well-used copy of the classic "Mere Christianity", by the late Prof. C.S.Lewis. The heading given to the first section is "Right and wrong as a clue to the meaning of the universe". Obviously, the length of a post hinders me from providing a complete synopsis of the section but, having used some examples akin to the very 'problem' that Mr Dawkins has experienced, he arrives at the basic premis that "... human beings, all over the earth, have this curious idea that they ought to behave in a certain way, and cannot really get rid of it. ... [and] that they do not, in fact, behave in that way." (p.19) - what he refers to as a Moral Law. He goes on to develop this by explaining that this is neither instinct, nor social convention; and that "The moment you say that one set of moral ideas can be better than another, you are, in fact, measuring them both by a standard, saying that one of them conforms to that standard more nearly than the other" (p.23).

Over the next few chapters, Prof. Lewis leads us on to what I would consider to be the irrefutable position that, behind this Moral Law - the existence of which, even Richard Dawkins now appears (albeit unconsciously) to accept - is a sovereign Being Whom, in the English language, we refer to as 'God' (and Whose existence Richard Dawkins does not accept!).

"Mere Christianity" may well be out of print (my copy was published in 1955!!!), but it's a book that is well worth tracking down. In my opinion, it is still one of the best evaluations of, and arguments for, Christian theology - in spite of (or should that be 'because of'?!) the fact that it starts with the basic assumption that God doesn't even exist!! I wonder of Richard Dawkins has ever read it!?

Model railways, and sanctification!

One of the joys of retirement is the freedom to do things during normal working hours! Today, for example, I was able to visit Model Rail, Scotland, 2010 - an exhibition of model railways built by various Clubs throughout Scotland, and even from Newcastle (England). It is many years since I have had a model railway and, to be honest, mine wasn't much more than a train set! I was, therefore, totally amazed at how the hobby has progressed during those years.

The Exhibition was superb. There were layouts representing many parts of Scotland, together with Canada, Germany, Italy, and Wales. The sizes of the models ranged from the large '1' gauge, down to one of which I had never heard before - 'T' gauge, with a distance between the track rails of only 3mm!! There were amazing sound effects; carriage doors that opened and shut; new types of controller that allow up to three locomotives to be independently operated on the same stretch of track - without the complication of wiring up isolated sections.

The whole set-up of each layout was a work of art. Countryside; roadways (with operating trams in some cases!); harbours with realistic-looking water; small boats and medium-sized vessels; railway turntables; passengers on the platforms; etc., etc. As I looked, I realised that, in the years since I had last had a train set, the models had become more and more like the real thing!

On Sunday, I was preaching on the subject of Sanctification - the process through which the disciple of Jesus becomes more like Him. I thought of that, to day, as I wandered around the Exhibition. I asked myself if, during those years, I had become more like the real thing - even Jesus?! That should, of course, be my constant desire, and my focussed aim.

The other thought that struck me, today, concerned the dedication of the modellers. The time that is spent building, maintaining, and improving the layouts is a challenge to me and, I suspect, to many followers of Jesus. When I considered the time that they devote to their hobby, and compared it to the time that I tend to spend in the study of God's Word, and in prayer (two irreplacable activities in the process of sanctification), I was humbled. Yet their labour brings about something that, while very beautiful, is transient. The process of sanctification - that is, of course, a gracious work of Father God - leads to an eternal reward as, in glory, I see the Lord as He is; know Him as I am known; and spend eternity in the praise and worship of the "Lamb Who was slain from before the foundation of the world." (Rev.13:8).

I may well return to the Exhibition tomorrow - this time, remembering to take my camera! God grant that He may see as big a difference in me, as time passes by, as I have done in the world of Model Railways.

Richard Dawkins, and the Bible.

One of this morning's items in the Sunday programme, to which I listen, concerned a project to celebrate, next year, the 400th anniversary of the publication of the Authorised (King James) Version of the Bible. This project, apparently, involves people from all over the U.K., both the 'famous' and the 'ordinary' recording the reading of specific passages from the A.V., that they find particularly meaningful. All well and good, one might say!

However, the surprising bit of information was that the so-called 'high priest of humanistic atheism', Richard Dawkins - a man who is one of today's most vocal critical antagonists of Christianity and the Bible, has recorded a passage as part of this project! The passage that he has chosen is a few verses from the Old Testament book, The Song of Songs. Of course, being Mr Dawkins, he still has to get his little dig in! So, as was broadcast this morning, he commences by casting doubt on the Solomonic authorship of Canticles (the alternative title for the book), and in referring to it as a piece of "erotic poetry".

It so happens that I am currently reading the Song in my private devotions, so am in a better position, than I might have otherwise been, to comment thereon! First of all, the allegedly erudite Mr Dawkins should note that the authorship of Solomon is not only accepted by any of the Biblical scholars whom I have consulted, but is specifically stated in the opening sentence of the Song: "The Song of Songs, which [is] Solomon's" (1:1, A.V.). I am unaware of any available evidence that would suggest the contrary - but am always open to enlightenment!

As to the content of the Song it is true that, on the surface, it may be viewed as a song of physical love (Dawkins' description of it as an erotic poem, and his choosing a passage from it as having some special meaning to him, may suggest more about him than about the Song!). Indeed, a couple of the early Church leaders stated that the Jews forbade its reading by anyone less than forty years old! It is certainly a part of Scripture that requires a certain spiritual maturity (which, I would suggest, has not been attained by Richard Dawkins!) to understand. It is wholly allegorical, and is only fully understood as a very beautiful description of the relationship between the believer and the Lord Jesus.

Of course, as someone has said, "To the pure, all things are pure". It seems not unreasonable to suggest that the opposite may also be true - Mr Dawkins, please take note! Another old adage is that, concerning the Bible as the written Word of God, "The New [Testament] is in the Old [Testament] concealed; the Old is in the New revealed."

Richard Dawkins is one of those who would happily state that people who believe in the Bible as inspired by the Almighty God Who is the Creator, and Sustainer, of all that is, are simpletons; and that the [visible] church is full of hypocrites. Well Mr Dawkins, we always have room for one more, and your very willingness to be involved in a project that seeks to honour the very Bible that you so vociferously despise and attack, indicates that you are well qualified to fill that place.

Money, money, money!

One of the major news stories of the week, thus far, is the winning of £56 million (and 20p!!) by a couple from Gloucestershire. They have been featured in all of the national media and, as far as I can make out from the interviews held with them, they are a level-headed pair who will not simply squander this fortune that is actually beyond my full comprehension.

However, hearing of the win set me thinking. What would I do with £56 million (we'll ignore the 20p!)? Particularly at my age, I wouldn't need very much of it. Indeed, I reckon that a number of Christian ministries and organisations would be pleasantly surprised. I would happily write out a cheque for £10 million each for Release International, Open Doors, and Christian Solidarity Worldwide - three organisations that support the persecuted church in over 50 countries in the world today. Mission Aviation Fellowship (MAF) would also receive a cheque for £10 million as theirs is a high-cost ministry with the upkeep of aircraft, and the cost of fuel.

We have sponsored children for many years, so £3 million would be set up as a Trust Fund with World Vision to provide support for as many children as possible. ICC (International Christian College) is the descendant of the Bible Training Institute and would receive £2million to set up a Trust Fund to support overseas students in their studies. Aware of the benefits of Christian radio work, I would send a cheque for £2 million each to FEBA, and HCJB - two international ministries who beam the Gospel message into places where it is difficult for a physical missionary to work. As we have a particular fondness for France, I would give £1 million to Mission France; and another £1 million to GLO for its work in that country. The Preshal Trust would also receive £1 million in order to fulfil May Nicholson's vision of a purpose-built Centre for that work.

If I have been calculating correctly, that comes to £52 million. I would provide smaller cash boosts to a number of other organisations, to the tune of £3 million. The remaining £1 million (and 20p!) would ensure that my daughters had their mortgages, and any other outstanding debts, cleared; that my dear wife and I had a long holiday during which she would not have to lift a finger; and would ensure some extra income to supplement our pensions.

See! It doesn't take long to dispose of £56 million (and that 20p!). So, knowing how I would use it, why doesn't the Lord arrange for me to receive that kind of instant income? It seems, to me, to be a not unreasonable question!

Actually, I suspect that I already know the answer! I suspect that too many of us, if provided with such sums of money would lose some of our trust in the Lord to be our Provider. I fear that faith would be weakened, and trust transferred to a bank account.

I know that there are wealthy believers - both in the pages of the Bible, and in contemporary society - but I honestly believe it requires a special grace to handle such riches. In the meantime, I believe that I am called to be a good steward of all that the Lord has, in His wisdom, entrusted to me. For me, that starts with the tithe (10%), and goes on to the Love Gift (that's between the Lord and me!). Indeed, when I think of it, if every believer gave like that, then there probably wouldn't be any need for large donations to any genuine ministry. So, rather than be despondent that I don't have £56 million, and 20p, I'll simply thank the Lord for His constant provision of all that I need, and my ability to support His work in the world in accordance with the way in which He has blessed me.

However, if He ever does decide to bless me with £56 million (with, or without, the 20p) ... ... ...!!!!!!

Love, and marriage.

"Love and marriage;
Love and marriage
Go together like a horse and carriage.
This I tell you, brother - You can't have one without the other!"

So, if my memory serves me well, sang Alma Cogan - but if I am wrong, then some old codger will undoubtedly correct me!!

I thought of the song when, a few days ago, I read that the trend for couples to commit themselves to a formal marriage is, again, taking a downward path. Now, at the risk of having some of my regular readers label me as a liberal-minded heretic, let me say that I actually have more time for the co-habiting couple who are faithful to one another, than the couple who have gone through a marriage ceremony of whatever sort but who, either/both, then 'play the field' with a string of extra-marital affairs!

However, as those who do know me are aware, I am a passionate defender of the institution of marriage - especially for those who claim to be members of the Body of Christ. Co-habitation is one thing; a Christian marriage is another altogether. On this Valentine's day, we tend to think only of the 'romantic' aspect of love. For many, cards, and flowers, and chocolates, and special treats are the order of the day. And I would be the last to condemn any of that! But ... ... ..."!

So why is marriage so important? I would suggest that it is is for the very simple reason that every day is not Valentine's Day; that young couples grow old; that not all the 'miracle' creams and lotions (however much "You're worth it"!) in the world can keep the lines and wrinkles away for ever; that the vigour and vitality of youth become, all too quickly, the wheezing and the weakness of old age.

On Songs of Praise, this evening, I listened to the actress who plays the character Peggy in the radio serial The Archers. She had to play the part of a wife whose husband suffered from Altzheimer's - and that radio part mirrored her experience in her real life and marriage. However, she reminded us that the vows in the Christian marriage service speak of sickness, as well as health; of poorer, as well as richer; of worse, as well as better. Listening to her testify to the love that she continued to have for the husband who, in many ways, was nothing like the man she had married all those decades earlier; and to the strength that she received from God when the situation was tough; I knew that I was listening to one who had understood her marriage vows, and who had kept them well.

The Christian marriage service is also a Covenant relationship. It is not even just a civil contract. It is an eternal threesome of husband, wife, and Father God. It is "until God shall separate us by death"! All of this involves commitment on the part of both the husband and the wife. If I am merely 'living with' a woman (what a previous generation referred to as "living in sin"!), then all may be well while we are in our twenties, or thirties, or forties. But what happens when I start to lose my boyish charm; when my 'partner' starts to lose her sexy figure? What happens when I am required to clean up after her when she has been violently sick in bed; or when she has to clean up after me when I am suffering from the dreaded Montezuma's Revenge (diarrhoea, to the uninitiated!)? And if such situations happen while I am still a viable proposition to another woman (or my 'partner' to another man), how much easier it must be to walk away. No ties; no commitment; no worries!!!

"Love", said another song-writer, "is a many-splendoured thing." I suspect that the reference there was simply to moonlight and roses; to balmy days on palm-bordered beaches; to beautiful sunsets over peacefiul lagoons. But real love - the love that translates the Greek word 'agape', is a giving love; a selfless love; an unconditional love. It is the love that Almighty God, in His grace and mercy, shows to sinful mankind. How sad that so many reject it, out of hand.

So, back to the Alma Cogan song. If you truly love each other, take that step of commitment and enter into a marriage relationship. Don't settle for second-best. If there is no-one even 'on the horizon', then rejoice that you may still be a partaker of the love of Almighty God. And, married or single, build every relationship on a saving relationship with Him - made possible through the greatest act of selfless love in the history of mankind: the passion and death of the Lord Jesus. As the old sticker used to proclaim: "God is love; Calvary proves it"!

Birthday Anniversaries!

Since it has now gone 11.15 p.m., I am officially a full year older! Yes, that's me reached 28 (and some months!!!) again!

Seriously, I sometimes wonder where the time goes (simple answer - it goes into, or becomes, the past!). As I look back over my life, I see so much that I wanted to do, but have never done; I see so many mistakes that I made; I see as many broken relationships as lasting ones. All in all, I could think of many reasons to be disheartened and depressed.

But then I remember - I can celebrate two birthdays! A few days before my 15th (physical) birthday anniversary, I made a conscious commitment of my life to the Lord Jesus and, in the words of John 3:3, I was born again. On that occasion, the birth was a spiritual one and I became a child of the Living God; a joint-heir with the Lord Jesus Christ.

One of the wonderful outcomes of that second birth was that I received forgiveness of all of my sins - even those that I had not yet committed! I accepted that Jesus had paid the penalty for my all of my sin as He hung on the cross at Calvary; and that His shed blood atoned for my transgressions.

So, as I look back over my physical life, but remember my spiritual life, my depression is lifted, and my despondency is cheered up. On that day (Feb 9th, 1959), I moved from the kingdom of darkness into the Kingdom of Light; from being under the wrath of the sinless and holy God to being under His grace; from being the recipient of righteous judgement to being the partaker of His love.

As if all of that were not enough, I also have an assurance that this life is not the end and that, for me - as for all who have similarly committed their lives to Jesus - their is a resurrection life in a dimension that I am incapable of understanding while in this mortal body. I don't know exactly what it will be like, but I know that it will be far better (see Philippians 1:23)

The only question is - Will you be there? I trust that you will - to His glory.

One law for them??

The U.K. news during the past week has featured at least two major stories that seem to suggest that British law is a multi-faceted entity.

Much has been made of the sexual shenanigans of the (now former) captain of the English national footbal team. This gentleman, it has been alleged, has been in an encounter of the very close kind with the former girlfriend of one of his national team-mates. This, in my old-fashioned type of morality, is adultery, and I am not going to make any attempt to defend Mr Terry's activity. However, it is interesting to note that he has had the English team captaincy taken from him - a punishment, I imagine, that means a lot more to him than it would to me!

Now, let's take just one example from the world of the rest of the rich and famous. On Remembrance Day 2008, senior Labour Party politician Nigel Griffiths smuggled a woman - who was not his wife - into the House of Commons, and not only had a 'sexual romp' with her, but actually filmed the hour-long encounter. And what was the punishment that this (dis) honourable gentleman had to face? As far as I can make out, there was nothing (someone please correct me if I am wrong). It is true that he has intimated his intention to stand down from his Edinburgh Parliamentary seat at the forthcoming General Election but, even then, he will do so with a handsome financial severance package, and a pension that will make mine look like pocket-money!

The other issue to hit the headlines was the ongoing saga of members', and Lords', expenses. Only three members of the House of Commons, and one from the House of Lords, have been formally charged with fraudulent activity. However, I seem to recall that there were a lot more than 3+1 who were guilty of similar "creative accounting". I am no more of an apologist for Livingston MP Jim Devine - one of the three - than for John Terry, but his misdemeanour seems to fade into relative insignificance when compared to that of, for example, Barbara Follett, a former Labour government minister who is being told to repay more than £42,000 that was wrongly claimed for items such as security and insurance.

So what is wrong with British justice, and our fabled "sense of fair play"? I am reminded of the wise saying in the Old Testament book of Proverbs: "Righteousness exalts a nation, but sin is a disgrace to any people." (14:34) It is to be hoped that, at the Election, with so many 'standing down' (rather than face the ignominy of losing their seats - with the resultant loss of that severance package!), that the corridors of power at Westminster will be filled with a new breed of politician - those who are men and women of faith and integrity, and who put the Lord at the centre of their lives. Perhaps, then, we might see this nation return to the paths of righteousness from which it has so long departed.