WANTED - Intercessors!

A pastor, any years ago, asked a young servant-girl what she was doing for the Lord.  She explained that she had very little time off and, therefore, was unable to attend the various meetings of the fellowship.  However, she assured him that she did take the daily newspaper up to her bedroom every night.  Somewhat confused by such an answer, the pastor asked her what possible spiritual benefit could be obtained by such an action.

"Well." replied the girl, "I turn to the notices about births, marriages, and deaths.  Then I pray for each of the new babies, by name, asking the Lord that they might receive Him at an early age, and be a source of blessing to many.  Next, I check the weddings, and pray that the newly-married couples will be truly happy; build their homes on Jesus; and always remain faithful to one another.  Finally, I read the death notices, and pray for each bereaved family - asking that, in their sorrow, they might turn to the Lord Who is the only source of real comfort."

Here, surely, was one who had learned two important truths:
   1. that prayer works; and
   2. that there is great benefit in praying for one another by name.

The pastor was certainly impressed with her obvious sincerity; her unusual (if not unique!) ministry; and her faithful intercession.  Indeed, he found himself wishing that there were more like her in the congregation!

Those who claim to be disciples of Jesus are called to pray regularly and faithfully (Eph.6:18, inter al).  Let us do so - not that other people (even pastors!) might be impressed, but that the Name of Jesus might be glorified; that sinners might be brought to salvation; and that the saints of God (especially those in the 'persecuted church') might be strengthened, and blessed.

After all, if Jesus was willing to die for the world, the least that we can do is to pray for it!

When the dust has settled.

So, the U.K. General Election of 2015 is over - perhaps!   Some will be very happy with the result; others less so.  Certainly, almost four million voters are more than a little disappointed that UKIP have only one sitting Member in the House of Commons - and even more disappointed that Mr Nigel Farage is not there!

The results have confirmed what many have suspected for a long time - that the current "First Past The Post" system of electing the UK Parliament is well past its 'sell-by' date.  It is a simple mathematical fact that, e.g., only 34,348 national votes were required to elect an MP representing the Conservative Party; while 3,881,129 UKIP votes resulted in only one MP being elected!  In any definition of 'democracy', that cannot be right!  In the wake of the election results, a number of online petitions have been organised.  One such may be found at http://action.makeseatsmatchvotes.org/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1754&ea.campaign.id=38262&ea.tracking.id=msmv

Of course, the conspiracy theories now abound.  Normally, I am not one to give such theories much credence, but some of what I have read on social media (sometimes more accurate and truthful than the MSM!) would indicate that there is definitely a case to be answered.   Stories abound of missing boxes; delayed counts; and names of candidates missing on ballot papers.  It may all be the result of over-active imaginations - but with so much involved, it is surely worth a formal investigation.

This will, I hope, be my final 'political' post for a wee while.  My next one is planned to be of a more moral/spiritual flavour.  If you have started to check out my blog on the basis of the past few posts, please don't abandon me!  I would like to think that you might find the other matters that I raise, and the information that I share, to be of interest.  Of course, you won't know if you don't check it out!

May 7th - Why I will be voting UKIP!

So, here we are, at the last of this brief series of pre-election posts, with the one for which you have all been waiting - the positive one!

So why am I not only supporting the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), but also suggesting that it is the Party that disciples of Jesus throughout the UK should support?  Well, I know that one ought not to judge a book by its cover.  I know that no one man (or woman) makes a political party.  However, I have to say that one reason why I am supporting UKIP is Nigel Farage!  I have, like most people, watched a great deal on the political scene over recent weeks (and before!).  I have listened to the leaders of the various political parties being interviewed by a range of political commentators.  Only one has consistently answered the questions that have been asked.  I may not have agreed fully with every answer - but I admire basic honesty, and integrity.  I also like my potential statesmen to look like statesmen - not lads off to the pub for a drink!  Interestingly, the only one who has fulfilled those basic criteria is the one who is seen, most often, in a pub - Mr Farage.  I just get a 'good feeling' about the man - and I am teetotal!

However, it is policy that is the real nub of the argument.  So what are the UKIP policies that have persuaded me to support the Party?  Well, first and foremost, UKIP was the only Party, with any worthwhile representation in British politics, to oppose the redefinition of marriage.  Indeed Mr Farage is on record as having said that "... all the while we are signed up to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg ... we have the risk that our established church, and possibly other faith communities could ultimately, under discrimination laws, be forced to conduct services that they find anathema.  If we get rid of the ECHR, and it doesn't have the dominant place over our society, we'll look at it [the ACT] again."

UKIP also believes that the last government has shown contempt for families in which one parent (usually the mother) stays at home to care for the children.  As a Party, it is totally supportive of stay-at-home mothers.

Staying with the family, in general, Louise Bours, UKIP's Health spokesperson, has voiced concern over girls as young as 10 years of age being given a contraceptive implant through the NHS, and the generally casual attitude towards under-age sexual activity that appears to be condoned, if not encouraged, by the traditional parties.

Of course, there are specific areas in which UKIP has been badly misrepresented by the main-stream media, and the other political parties.  Perhaps the worst of these has been on the issue of immigration.  How often am I informed that "UKIP is a racist party"?  Yet nothing could be further from the truth!   In spite of what is parroted by the opposition, UKIP is NOT "anti-immigration"!  What it does support is CONTROLLED immigration - a totally different kettle of fish.  There are seven points in the Manifesto - and I would defy any right-thinking person to produce a reasonable objection to any one of them.  (Link to Manifesto at the end of this post!).

Then there is the issue of Foreign Aid.  "UKIP want to stop helping other people", is the usual cry.  Rubbish!   What UKIP would do is to direct foreign aid - no longer sending million of pounds sterling to countries that neither need, nor want, it - e.g. India, with its own space exploration programme; or to countries in which human rights are consistently breached.  Rather, they would target such aid to specific needs, such as the current earthquake and avalanche disaster in Nepal.

Not only will the defence of the realm be a major commitment on the part of UKIP, but they will also look after military veterans in a way that the other parties do not seem to think necessary!   UKIP is, as far as I know, the only Party to have specific sections in its Manifesto regarding Small Businesses, and Animal Rights!

However, the policy for which UKIP is best known - and that on which it was founded - is the ending of the UK's membership of the European Union.  Those who are of my vintage may recall that what we entered into (although, personally, I voted against!) in 1972 was a "European Economic Community".  The Conservative Prime Minister, Edward Heath, stated, quite categorically, that those who feared a loss of British sovereignty were wrong.   Towards the end of his own life, he admitted that he had misled the British public, and that he had known, all along, what would happen.  The EEC was to be a trading bloc - and a UK, independent of the current EU - with its unelected Commissioners 'calling the shots' would be able to enter into such an agreement again.  However, being free of the shackles of the EU would enable us to also enter trading agreement with other countries - not least the former Commonwealth countries who have been blocked by trading tariffs since those early days of the EEC!

I could go on, but permit me to make just one further point: Nigel Farage has said that Britain is a Judaeo-Christian country, and that we need to "start standing up for our values".  Allied to that statement is the assurance that UKIP would not permit the Islamic system of Sharia (Islamic law) to operate, as it currently does, in parallel with UK law.  They would ensure that "... all communities are aware of, and adhere to, the supremacy of British law."  UKIP is also the only Party that has issued a specifically "Christian Manifesto" - Valuing Our Christian Heritage!

Although, as charitable foundations, neither Christian Concern, nor The Christian Institute, are permitted to support any specific political party, I believe that each has gone as far as is legally, and ethically, possible in encouraging disciples of Jesus to support UKIP!

So, am I supporting UKIP because it is a Christian Party?  Sadly, it is not.  There are a number of issues that I continue to have with the Party, and even its policies.  However, compared to the alternatives, it is streets ahead and, of course, if thousands of the disciples of Jesus join the Party then, just as the more UKIP MPs are elected on Thursday, the greater the influence the Party will have on the ensuing government, the greater the influence those believers will have on the Party! 

On Thursday, please use your vote.  If you have a UKIP candidate on your ballot-paper, please vote in his/her favour.  If you haven't, my only advice would be to 'spoil your vote' by writing "None of the above" at the bottom, and drawing a large X across all of the candidates' names!  Oh, and do remember to take your own, black ink, pen.  The pencils that are provided make changing a vote much too easy!

Whatever you do, take confidence in this: the Lord already knows the full result, and He is still in control!  Hallelujah!

The full Manifesto.  https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ukipdev/pages/1103/attachments/original/1429295050/UKIPManifesto2015.pdf?1429295050

Manifesto summary.  http://www.ukip.org/manifesto2015

Christain Manifesto.  http://www.election2015.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/UKIPChristian_Manifesto-1.pdf

May 7th - Why I won't be voting SNP.

This is my penultimate pre-election, political post.  I am not dealing with the specifically N.Irish and Welsh Parties as none of them are, for obvious reasons, standing in Scotland.  Nor am I dealing with the very minor Parties (could include the LibDems, next time around!!).

However, I have to make mention of

The Scottish National Party (The Scottish Nasty Party).

There is nothing unexpected in the SNP Manifesto.  This is the Party that, in its manifesto for the 2011 Scottish Parliamentary Election, pledged to consult on same-gender 'marriage'.  It did so - but pushed the legislation through even although some 64% of respondents opposed such a redefinition of marriage.  Ministers even denied that there was any need for amendments to the Bill that would have protected religious liberty and freedom of speech (something that, as many are aware, lost me my Strathclyde Police Chaplaincy!).

This is also the Party that has introduced the controversial 'Named Person' scheme that allows an outsider to interfere in the lives of ordinary families by having a "State representative" for every child, from birth until they have attained 18 years of age - a person who can, for example, ask questions of a Primary School child that relate to what happens within the home, and what level of sex education the child has been given!  This scheme - which is being challenged by a wide range of people and organisations - is planned to be rolled out by August of next year, although 'pilot schemes' have already operated in a number of areas.

Nicola Sturgeon, the current leader of the SNP, is in favour of a "rights envoy" for those who practice sexual deviance.  This person would promote their 'rights' "throughout the world, as an integral part of UK foreign policy"!  Talk about the tail wagging the dog!

In 2004, an SNP spokesman welcomed the introduction of the Civil Partnership Bill.  All of the contemporary SNP MPs supported the Bill at Westminster - and voted against the benefits of the Bill being provided to siblings, or a parent and carer 'child' who shared a home, but not a bed!

Last year, the SNP Government published revised guidance for sex education in Scottish schools.  The guidance emphasises the 'rights' of children at the expense of parental involvement, and says that a "named person" (as above) should be given confidential information that should be kept from parents!

In spite of the assurance, given by the previous Leader of the Party, after the referendum on Scottish separation from the rest of the UK, that such a referendum would not be held again "in his lifetime", his successor is already making noises as to the possibility of a second referendum during the lifetime of the next Scottish Parliament.  As one of the 55%, I find this a very dangerous move that could, so soon after the previous one, end up with the "yes" camp actually being successful!  This, I believe, would be simply because of the same - in my opinion - unthinking euphoria that will see a dramatic increase in the Westminster seats won by the SNP next week.  It would not be for the good of the country, or of its people.

These are some of the reasons why, next Thursday, my vote will not be cast in support of the SNP.

May 7th - Why I won't be voting LibDem.

In this third pre-election post, I want to explain why I will not be supporting the

Liberal Democrats (LimpDumbs).

Of course, one question might well be, "Why would anyone do so?"   This Party may well be wiped out - or have its Parliamentary representation decimated - at the forthcoming General Election and, in my opinion, that would be no bad thing.  It was a Liberal politician, David Steel, who introduced the Abortion Bill that was eventually enacted - and has led to the murder, in the womb, of millions of unique, individual, human beings.  Their record on pandering to the homosexual lobby is no better than the other two 'traditional' Parties: "We will ... permit humanist weddings and opposite sex civil partnerships, and liberalise the rules about the location, timing and content of wedding ceremonies ... promote international recognition of same sex marriages and civil partnerships as part of a comprehensive International LGBT Rights Strategy" (p107).  No suggestion that they will seek to bolster the only family unit that, alone, can - without a 'third party' - ensure the continuation of the human race!

Of course, the Liberal Democrats, as part of the Coalition Government, were eager to support their Conservative partners in legislating for the redefinition of marriage.  This is not surprising as their current leader has, in the past, called for all 'church schools' to teach that homosexuality is "normal and harmless"!  The Schools Minister, David Laws, has stated that it is unacceptable for such schools to teach that homosexuality is morally wrong.  From a Christian perspective it certainly is - see, e.g., I Cor.6:9; I Tim.1:10, but that won't bother the average LibDem (one notable exception would be David Alton, now Lord Alton - sitting as a 'Cross-bencher' in the House of Lords) parliamentarian, or activist!

The Party also supports the legalisation of assisted suicide, and has consistently called for a radical reform of the UK's drug laws - announcing the most far-reaching liberalisation measures of any of the traditionally major parties.  At its Spring Conference, just a few weeks ago, it reaffirmed the LibDem belief that people have the inalienable right to offend others: "There is no place for restrictions on acts of blasphemy (which is still, strictly speaking, a crime in Scotland!) in law, or by intimidation leading to self-censorship."  They appear to never have read Exodus 20:7!

The LibDems also supported the Labour Government when, in 2007, the Sexual Orientation Regulations (SORs) were introduced - leading to the closure of adoption agencies, in England, run by the Church of Rome.  About one-third of Conservative MPs, including the Party leader, Mr David Cameron, also supported the introduction of these regulations.

In 2010, the LibDems enthusiastically supported the Equality Act, voting for the narrowing of employment protection for churches and religious organisations.  They also argued that religion should not be included as a protected characteristic in the public sector equality duty.  Of course, they would be more than unwilling to, themselves, employ an activist from another political party!  The words 'sauce', 'goose', 'gander', and 'good' come to mind!

With regard to pornography, the 2013 Conference rejected a motion for an automatic block on internet pornography.  Indeed, one speaker argued that such a block would be "counter to all liberal instincts."  Of course, with the almost daily revelations of  paedophilia practised by politicians in all of the traditionally 'major' parties, it is little wonder that they appear to be quick to 'close ranks', and to promote legislation that makes such activity less illegal - even if still morally indefensible.

These, then, are some of the reasons why, on May 7th, I will not be supporting the Liberal Democrats.