Important Information.

STOP PRESS: The third book in my series - "Defending the Faith" - is now available, as a paperback, at
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/1791394388
Please note that ALL royalties, on all three books, now go directly to Release International in support of the persecuted church. E-book now also available at
https://tinyurl.com/y2ffqlur

My second book - Foundations of the Faith - is available as a Kindle e-book at https://tinyurl.com/y243fhgf
Paperback available at:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/151731206X

The first volume - Great Words of the Faith - is available at https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/B009EG6TJW
Paperback available at:
https://tinyurl.com/y42ptl3k

If you haven't got a Kindle, there is a FREE app at
https://tinyurl.com/35y5yed

ALL royalties now go to support the persecuted church.

I may be contacted, personally, at author@minister.com




For those who are bi-lingual, I now have a second blog, in the French language, that publishes twice-monthly. Go to: https://crazyrevfr.blogspot.com/
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economy. Show all posts

27 Aug 2019

Female pastors!

It's not as if it is a subject to which I have never before given any thought! However, it is one that can cause severe polarisation, and I have tended to leave any discussion of it to private conversations. Until, that is, a friend posted a 'cartoon' on Facebook - and started a series of comments that is still growing!

The subject in question is that of female pastors. My personal stance is really quite simple and straightforward. The written Word of God makes perfectly clear that no woman should be in a position of spiritual authority over man. That, I would contend, means that no woman has the Biblical authority to be a pastor and teacher of men. Of course, this only became a major issue with the advent of the Women's Liberation Movement in the middle of the last century. Sadly, as still happens, the world was allowed to infiltrate the church, instead of the church going into all the world, and preaching the Gospel!

So, how have I arrived at such a conclusion? Well, my primary "proof texts" are in Paul's Holy Spirit inspired letters to two young pastors - Timothy and Titus. The relevant passages are:

I Tim. 3:1-7  "The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task.  Now a bishop must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher, no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God's church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may be puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil; moreover he must be well thought of by outsiders, or he may fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." 

Titus 1:5-9 "This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you, if any man is blameless, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of being profligate or insubordinate. For a bishop , as God's steward, must be blameless; he must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of goodness, master of himself, upright, holy, and self-controlled; he must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it."

Notice that, in both letters, Paul states that the person who is to be given spiritual authority (whether he refers to "episkopos" - "bishop"; or to "presbuteros" - "presbyter/elder") is to be "...  the husband of one wife ...". One does not need to be a theologian to understand that a "husband" is male. Some, of course, argue that Paul was a child of his time, and that women were lesser creatures in that society. Sorry! For a start, Christianity gave women a whole now status that they had never enjoyed before - not even within Judaism! Secondly, the Greek language has a perfectly good word for "spouse". If the roles were to be interchangeable, I would argue that God the Holy Spirit would have inspired the apostle to use that word! Thirdly, Paul consistently uses the masculine form of the pronouns - "he" and "his"!

As an aside, may I also point out that Paul was not referring to the idea of "one wife at a time", as some try to have us believe. Polygamy was a total "no-no" in the early church. What Paul was stating was that even a man who has been married; divorced; and remarried while his wife lives; is ineligible to be in a position of spiritual authority in the church! If the church in the west were to exercise discipline in that respect, a lot of "pastors/ministers/etc" would not be in the pulpit, or on the platform, this coming Sunday!

I would also take note of the following: "As in all the churches of the saints, the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church. What! Did the word of God originate with you, or are you the only ones it has reached?" (I Cor 14:33-36). 

If one is obedient to this particular passage, then it is clear that women should not have authority over men. Paul refers to "the law" - which, to him, would be the Torah (the five Books of Moses: Gen. - Deut.) - which records the words of Almighty God to the woman, immediately after the Fall: "I will greatly multiply your pain in childbearing; in pain you shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you." (Gen 3:16; emphasis added). Paul had already stated that women were permitted to pray and to prophesy (11:5) provided they were appropriately attired, so the injunction against speaking must apply to something else. It is unlikely that he was, in fact, referring to pastoral leadership and ministry, but (in context) to women seeking to evaluate what was being shared (see v.29).

Of course, there are also those who will quote Gal.3:28 - "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus." - and emphasise "neither male nor female"! However, one of the first principles of hermeneutics (the interpretation of the Word of God), is that "a text, taken out of context, is a pretext"! These words to the Galatian churches have nothing to do with spiritual authority or leadership. They refer to our salvation, which is equally available to all.

I could go on, but this is a blog post, not another book! However, I trust that some who read this post will realise that, regardless of modern western society with its political correctness, its women's liberation movements (although I don't see much activity from activists in that area when it comes to female genital mutilation, or to females who have been raped being stoned to death for 'adultery', to give just two examples!), or any other worldly movement, Almighty God has His own economy - and His Word stands. "Let God be true though every man be false, ..." (Rom 3:4).

Blessings, and shalom.

27 Apr 2015

May 7th - Why I won't be voting Conservative!



When I was in full-time pastoral ministry, and any election came about, I always encouraged my congregation to exercise their votes - but would never even hint at, let alone make, any suggestion as to which Party anyone ought to support.
However, as I am no longer in such a ministry, and as this is my personal blog, I am going to share where my own support is going to be on May 7th - if regular visitors to this blog haven't already worked that out!  Of course, I am doing so as a disciple of Jesus - believing that my chosen Party is the one that is closest to upholding the Judaeo/Christian heritage of this country.
Permit me, first of all, to explain why I am not going to vote for certain other Parties.  Not wanting this post to become as long as the average Party Election Manifesto, I'll deal with each of the traditional Parties over the next few posts.  We begin with the one that I believe will be the largest single Party in the new Parliament – but without the overall majority to form, on its own, a Government.
The Conservative (CONmerchant) Party.  This is the Party that introduced the legislation that led to the redefinition of marriage - in spite of the clear opposition in the country, and the fact that such a policy had not even been mentioned in their last manifesto!  However, the subject is mentioned in the current manifesto: "Our historic introduction of gay marriage has helped drive forward equality and strengthened the institution of marriage. But there is still more to do, and we will continue to champion equality for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people. We will build on the posthumous pardon of ... Alan Turing ... with a broader measure to lift the blight of outdated convictions of this nature" (p46).  So this is a Party that continues to champion the dismantling of traditional marriage and, at the same time, of the basic unit of society - the family.  

The current leader is also on record as saying, effectively, that there are too many white Christian faces in the UK; that he hopes to see a Muslim in 10 Downing Street; and that the British people should be adopting the Islamic culture and values!

Let us recall just some of Mr. Cameron's past comments - and his actions (or lack thereof!).
 

  • Shortly after taking office, Mr Cameron declared that the new Government would underline its commitment to the Armed Forces by putting it into law a new covenant - given legal force in a new Armed Services Bill - which would include rights to prioritised NHS treatment, decent housing and education for Service families’ children.
  • Reality:  Thousands of ex-servicemen, and women, are living on the streets, unable to find housing.  More money spent on upgrading MoD offices than on assisting military veterans return to civilian life.  Of course, this doesn't deal with the steady cut-back in the UK Armed Services that has gone on under the Coalition Government - led by the Conservatives.
  • Before the last General Election, Mr Cameron gave his (in)famous "cast-iron guarantee" to deliver a referendum on the Lisbon treaty during the lifetime of the ensuing Parliament.
  •  Reality:   He actually 'whipped' (nothing physical!) his MPs to prevent private members' attempts to legislate for a referendum in that Parliament.
  • Mr Cameron assured the electorate that the massive figure of net immigration would be brought down to "tens of thousands" each year.
  • Reality:  Latest figures indicate that around 500,000 immigrants entered the UK in 2014 alone.  This included Romanian and Bulgarian Roma criminals - a convicted Latvian murderer as the chief suspect in the murder of a little English girl being amongst the most recent highlights.  This, of course, is because the UK Border Agency is simply "not fit for purpose".   We certainly travel, frequently, to and from France, with sometimes not even being stopped, let alone have our passports and luggage checked!

  • The stated aim of the Coalition Government (senior partners, the Conservatives) was to deal with the economic deficit left by the previous Labour administration.  
  • Reality:  The national debt has increased from £0.8 trillion to more than £1.4 trillion - almost double what was 'inherited'!   

I could go on - Welfare Reform that isn't; a promise to hold a National Referendum on the UK's continuing membership of the EU - in 2017 (by which time, he knows, we will not be permitted to hold one without the prior agreement of the other countries in that despicable organisation); the power of recall that would allow the electorate in a constituency to, effectively, sack their MP if sufficient of them believed that (s)he was not representing them properly - but that ended up depending on the support of the 'offending' member's parliamentary colleagues! However, that should be sufficient to enable anyone to understand why the Conservative Party is not, in my opinion, worthy of my support.

This is the PM who told us, at the beginning of the last Parliament: "Judge me on my record!"  That, Mr Cameron, is exactly what I intend to do!