Doing it His way; and a massacre!

In the previous post, I mentioned that the Old Testament prophet, Malachi, had four main criticisms of the Children of Israel. The second of these was that they had failed to keep the covenant into which Almighty God had entered with them. 

"For the lips of a priest should guard knowledge, and men should seek instruction from his mouth, for he is the messenger of YHWH Sabaoth. But you have turned aside from the way; you have caused many to stumble by your instruction; you have corrupted the covenant of Levi, says YHWH Sabaoth, ..." (2:7-8).

The covenant to which he refers was a covenant that YHWH had made, with the priests, through Levi (see Numbers 25. Phineas was a descendant of Levi. This is "another example of the Heb. concept of 'corporate personality'; Levi represents the 'tribe of Levi' of the Levites . . ." (New International Bible Commentary. Zondervan), that they would teach the people, accurately and faithfully, all aspects of the divine law. This they had patently failed to do, and so Malachi faces them with this challenging and strong indictment.

However, I would contend that we are experiencing a similar situation in the church in the 21st century (and before!). In an article that I had published, recently, I stated: "Surely the church is intended to be a prophetic voice to the nation – not a subservient reflection of the social norms that, sadly, are so much at odds with the Gospel of our Lord Jesus, the Christ! Is it not the case that the established churches that are seeking to emulate society ... .... are slowly dying as they forsake the Word on which they should be founding their message to mankind?" One friend, here in France, often makes the point that the problem in the church is one of ignorance (in the correct definition of the word!) of the Word of God, and I believe that he is absolutely correct. But who is to blame? Surely it is those who have been charged with delivering, and explaining, that Word of God. Is it really being expounded in  the way in which it ought to be?

Now, of course, there are notable exceptions, and I could rhyme off a list of congregations/ fellowships in Scotland in which the Word is faithfully preached, without the addition of 'gimmicks'! However, there are far too many places in which the Word of God is so diluted, diminished, denigrated, denied, and even destroyed, that people leave having heard no divine challenge; no word from God; no revelation from heaven. We may have a semi-professional worship team (or a fine choir and an expensive organ); we may have hearty congregational singing; we may have our programmes to help the poor and downtrodden; we may have regular visiting of the sick; we may have a hundred-and-one wonderful programmes; but if we have no sound Biblical exposition and teaching, then our 'worship services' are a hollow mockery, and an empty pantomime!

I am convinced that, if Malachi were alive today, he would be thundering into the ears of the 'spiritual leadership' of our nations: "... you have turned aside from the way; you have caused many to stumble by your instruction; ..." (v.8). In that article already mentioned, I also wrote that when I consider "... the church adapting its beliefs and practices to conform with the current social zeitgeist, I wonder what Paul would think! That is the Paul who, under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, enjoined that we “… be not conformed to this world but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may prove what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” (Rom.12:2; emphasis added)."

Yesterday, in Texas, a young man deliberately murdered 26 people, and left another 27 seriously wounded in First Baptist Church of Sutherland Springs. This was no Muslim jihadist. This was no "gun-toting redneck". This was, it would appear, a young man who once taught briefly on a Christian vacation camp, but who had become a militant atheist. It begs the question - that doesn't apply only to the USoA - "What is happening to the teaching ministry in today's church?" Do our young people grasp the full meaning and implication of the Christian faith? Are they being shown how to live in accordance with the values revealed in the written Word of God? Do we provide them with clear Biblical instruction on how to cope with sexual permissiveness, and deviance; problems of authority; matters of morality?

Surely it is time that many in the church - and particularly in its leadership - became less concerned about changing the Gospel to suit society, and started to preach the Gospel that society might be changed! Paul's Holy Spirit inspired words are as relevant today, as ever they have been! It's time that we did it His way!

Tim Farron - is homosexuality a sin?

My personal admiration for David Robertson is no secret. As one of many who was dismayed and disappointed by the recent statement from Tim Farron, Leader of the Liberal Democratic Party (that, imo, is neither liberal nor democratic!) that "homosexuality is not a sin", I have been wondering how I might respond on this blog. David has done the work for me.

This article was published on Premier Christian Website in response to Tim Farron’s recent comments re gay sex.  A number of years ago we warned that the whole issue of sexuality had become the religion of our contemporary society and the shibboleth question.  At first we were told that accepting the current liberal absolutist morality would be voluntary, but we knew it would soon become determinative and prescriptive.  The fact that someone who apparently upheld the biblical view that sex outside marriage is wrong should be hounded and intimidated in this way is dreadful.  Bear in mind he was not be criticised for party policy or his actions but for the way he thought.  The thought police are now part of our civic culture.  Today in the Times David Aaronovitch suggested that we should offer absolution to the sinner who has now repented.(!!!)

Why Tim Farron’s comment on gay sex lets the Church down

By: David Robertson | 26th April 2017

Having repeatedly refused to answer the question ‘Is gay sex a sin?’, Tim Farron has finally given in to media pressure and stated: “I don’t think gay sex is a sin”. David Robertson responds

I feel real sympathy for Tim Farron. He is a decent man and a Christian who, whatever you may think of his politics, comes across as sincere, intelligent and passionate. Because of his Christianity he has been hounded for years. And although I profoundly disagree with his support of same sex marriage I have defended him many times – including on television and on this blog.

Overall he has acquitted himself well but this week he seems to have let himself down and those who were defending him. After years of deflecting the question of whether gay sex was wrong, he has now publicly stated that it is not. In doing so he has let himself, the Liberal party and the Church down. Why?

Farron’s comments will not prevent the criticism or the attacks. Although it may make the news story move on – which was undoubtedly the intention. Before he looked evasive when he refused to say whether or not gay sex was wrong. But now he looks weak – giving into the media pressure or perhaps the media advisors in his own party: “Make it go away Tim”. This of course may be grossly unfair – it is possible that all along he really thought that gay sex was not wrong and that it was some kind of principled evasion that he now accepts looks bad. But it is doubtful whether many will believe that he was that stupid

Farron’s apparent U-turn is not helpful to the Lib Dems because it makes them look illiberal. I was a founder member of the Social Democrats – the ‘Dem’ part of the Lib Dems. Because I uphold the teaching of Jesus that all sex outside of marriage (which is between a man and a woman) is wrong, then I would no longer be welcome in my old party. Tim Farron tried to defend and exemplify the traditional liberalism that allowed diversity of views and freedom of expression. But by caving into this pressure one can sense that even the Liberals have headed down the increasingly totalitarian thought-police route of our culture.

Note that this was not about policy, or politics (Farron has repeatedly voted in favour of LGBT rights). This media storm was only about Farron’s personal thoughts. So it seems unless our politicians think the right thoughts they can be outed and condemned. That’s hardly the essence of a liberal society, is it?

Tim Farron has let the Church down. Now it’s not just liberal clergy (who have never been too keen on Scripture anyway) but an increasing number of ‘evangelicals’ who are changing their view.  So whether it is the liberals who say that the Bible has got it wrong, or the post-truth evangelicals who say that we have got the Bible wrong, it leaves the rest of us being treated and viewed as some kind of out of touch Westboro Baptist group. It feels as though we’re being picked off one by one.

I’m afraid that when I heard of Tim’s turnaround, the thought ‘another one bites the dust’ struck me. I say this with incredible sorrow because I can only imagine the struggle and pain that Tim has gone through – and I know how easy it is to snipe from the sidelines. I also know how easy it is to give in to the pressures.

So let’s not be too quick to rush in to condemn or to justify. We need to pray for Tim as we do for all our political leaders. If our hearts are heavy because we regard him as an errant brother then we must pray all the more. And let us be aware of the price that Christians are asked to pay as they are increasingly targeted by the illiberal secular thought police. Channel 4’s behaviour in this witchhunt has been despicable but we can expect it to be repeated.

The Church needs to get its act together. If the trumpet give an uncertain sound, then little wonder that the troops are confused. When so many Church leaders are caving into the demands of contemporary culture it is hardly surprising that Christians like Farron follow. And its not enough for those of us who hold to the teaching of Jesus to expect others to be our martyrs. We need to be the salt and the light.

Let’s not circle the wagons, retreat into the bunkers, or shoot our own wounded. But instead let’s confess our own sin, look to the Lord and endeavour to serve Him with new obedience. May the Lord raise up those who will stand in the gap, who will be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves. And may He have mercy on us all.

Premier has another couple of excellent articles on this subject:

I gave my homosexuality to God

And Why Farrons Christianity Costs Him

Public Morality.

When the morality, and personal behaviour, of public figures is questioned, there are always those who insist that "as long as they can do the job".   However, increasing revelations of historic paedophilia, and other forms of sexual abuse; of the fraudulent claiming of expenses; of the abuse, and misuse, of power and authority; lead me to believe that the public should actually take greater care in checking out the personal morals, and behaviour of those whom they elect and who, in turn, are often in a position to influence the promotion of those in, for example, the judiciary.

The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics state that the numbers of homosexuals and lesbians etc., in the United Kingdom, is 1.6% of the population.  I have looked, but have been unable to find, figures for the number of parliamentarians who are openly in one of the sexually-deviant groups but, with 650 members in the UK Westminster Parliament, any number over 10 is higher than the national average.  I think that I can safely say that there are more than 10 openly homosexual/lesbian members in the Lower House!  I have often wondered if this was a major factor in the passing of The Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act, 2013, in spite of the clear majority of the general public were opposed to the measure.  Too many had a vested interest - either for themselves or their friends!

So, perhaps this is why we should, indeed, check out the morals, sexual preferences, ethics, and anything else about those who represent us.  Otherwise, we may continue to place, in positions of influence and authority, those who hold views that are diametrically opposed to the majority.  It is one of the reasons why I am currently supporting The United Kingdom Independence Party.  It's not simply because I am opposed to the European Union.  It's not because I would not still prefer an overtly Christian Party in charge (I doubt, in all honesty, that that will ever happen).  Its because they appear to be the only viable Party that holds to at least some of the policies that I can, in conscience, support.

It's now only about six months to the next U.K. General Election.  Let us be careful how we vote.  Remember, we often get the government for which we have failed to pray!

Aid, vaccinations, and promises.

Unlike some, I applaud the Prime Minister for his brave move in committing the U.K. to providing £814 million to provide vaccinations for children in some of the poorest of the world's developing countries.  He was obviously aware that his announcement would be unacceptable to the "charity begins at home" brigade, but he went ahead and did the honourable thing. 

His very words were telling.  "I think there is a strong moral case for keeping our promises to the world's poorest and helping them, even when we face challenges at home." he said.  "When you make a promise to the poorest children in the world, you should keep it."

However, I do hope that Mr Cameron will quickly realise that, when one makes a promise to anyone, there is a strong moral case for doing all in one's power to keep it.  On that basis, I look forward to his announcement that, after all of the pre-General Election blustering about a referendum on our continuing membership of the dysfunctional gravy-train that is known as the European Union, and that costs us almost £50 million EVERY DAY (not including euro-zone bail-outs), one will be announced in the next Queen's Speech.

Mind you, I'm not holding my breath!

The STD bombshell!

I recall the excitement when STD was introduced to the U.K. I mean, of course, Subscriber Trunk Dialling - the means by which one no longer had to go through the operator at the local telephone exchange in order to be connected to a particular number.

However, those letters eventually came to signify something much less exciting. Another memory is of being in Glasgow, and seeing a large bill-board at the site now occupied by a major shopping centre. There were two notices on it. The first one provided the contact details for a clinic for those who thought that they might have contracted one of the sexually transmitted diseases - venereal diseases as they had been previously known - and encouraging them to do so. The other notice, in a classic example of unfortunate juxtaposition, showed a buxom Glasgow housewife, complete with coat and hat, a big smile on her face, and a well-filled shopping basket in her hand. The accompanying caption read: "I got it at the Co-op"!!! I have to admit that I was very wary about entering a Co-operative store for some time afterwards!!

One of today's UK news items concerned the statistics from the Health Protection Agency, which recorded almost half a million new cases of sexually transmitted diseases in 2009, mostly among the young - data that confirms this country’s unassailable position as Europe’s trailblazer in sexual irresponsibility.

What so many of those who contract these diseases do not seem to realise is that, while treatment is apparently much easier and quicker today, there are long-term consequences. On this morning's Today programme on BBC Radio 4, the point was made that they can cause infertility. It was also affirmed that some of the diseases - gonorrhea was specified - have developed a growing resistance to the treatment provided. And it should never be forgotten that STDs can cause other physical problems - and may even be transmitted to an unborn child!

But why should there be such a high incidence of STDs in the U.K.? Or, to put it another way, why is there so much sexual activity among young people in particular? The benefit system has, almost certainly, a part to play. Too many young girls seem to think that having a baby is the beginning of a career in which the state (i.e. the tax-payer!) will provide everything that is required. The attitude to alcohol must also, surely, bear some of the blame. The apparent desire of the previous Labour government to have sex education given to children who were barely out of nursery school - the mechanics, without any refernce to the morality - may have made even those children who might have held back from active sexual intercourse more curious about it. The loss of the stigma that unmarried parenthood used to have. The list could probably go on, and on!

So, is there an answer? Of course there is - but who, in authority, is going to listen? We could start by actually prosecuting those who have sexual intercourse before they are 16 years of age - and maybe even raise that to 18 years of age. It's a law to which a 'blind eye' has been turned for too long! We could insist that fathers - whose identity may be verified by the use of DNA samples - be responsible, financially as well as any other way, for their offspring. We could then cut back on welfare support such as a flat, a brand-new buggie, cot, clothing, etc., etc.

Yet even all of that would only cut down the incidence of STDs - and of abortion! The ultimate answer is even more radically reactive. I don't want to get too personal, but when the AIDS epidemic was recognised, many people went to clinics just to check their condition. Neither my wife nor I bothered to do so. There was a simple reason for that. Each of us had remained chaste until we were married to one another; and we had remained faithful to each other since then. Therefore, there was no way in which either of us could have contracted any type of STD!

It's the Christian way! Paul writes to the young church in Corinth, a city that was, in those days, infamous for its sexual immorality: "Don't you realize that your bodies are actually parts of Christ? Should a man take his body, which is part of Christ, and join it to a prostitute? Never! And don't you realize that if a man joins himself to a prostitute, he becomes one body with her? For the Scriptures say, 'The two are united into one.' But the person who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. Run from sexual sin! No other sin so clearly affects the body as this one does. For sexual immorality is a sin against your own body. Don't you realize that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, Who lives in you and was given to you by God? You do not belong to yourself, for God bought you with a high price. So you must honour God with your body." (I Cor.6:15-20)

Abstinence before marriage, and faithfulness within it, really is the only answer. How sad that it is rejected by so many!