I was listening to an interview this morning with the newly elected leader of the British Labour Party, Ed Miliband. He was asked the 'big question' by Radio 5's Nicki Campbell, 'do you believe in God?'
His answer was sad if not unsurprising, he answered that he did not personally believe in God but went on to explain that he was a tolerant enough to accept that many people did.
This now means that the leaders of two of the big three British Political party's do not believe in the existence of their creator. Of ED Miliband, Nick Clegg and David Cameron only our present Prime Minister David Cameron actually believes there is a God. It does not say much for the judgement of those who would seek to lead our nation that they can look at creation and not believe there is a creator. I suppose they have been brain washed by evolutionary propaganda like so many of the rest of the population and they are to be pitied more than vilified.
I suppose this is just further evidence that Britain is now firmly post Christian or Pagan. How we need the Lord to move in these days by His Holy Spirit and open the blinded eyes of our fellow country men and women, all we can do is keep being faithful to Him and carry out the great commission given by our blessed Saviour.
'And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.' Mark 16 v15
Wednesday, 29 September 2010
Monday, 20 September 2010
What is a Saint?
As one of his final acts before leaving the UK pope Benedict has beatified Cardinal Newman the 19th Century Anglican who infamously converted to Catholicism. In case you don’t know what it means to be beatified it is simply the pope making someone a Saint.
In order to be made a Saint by the Roman Catholic Church one must first be declared after their death to have been a ‘Servant of God’, then someone latter the person will be given the description of ‘venerable’, if then a miracle can be attributed to you, you are the well on your way to Sainthood. However, one miracle is not enough, there must be a second miracle that is clearly attributed to you and then you can be declared a Saint by the pope.
The second miracle attributed to Cardinal Newman was that of a man called Jack Sullivan who suffered from severe back pain due to a vertebrae on his lower back turning inwards and squeezing on his spine. He claims that he was healed after praying to Cardinal Newman for healing. I do not know enough about Mr Sullivan’s medical case to comment on the veracity of his claims for healing but I do not this, if he was healed it was nothing to do with Cardinal Newman it was all down to God graciously touching his infirmity. Even the miracles of the Bible carried out by Elijah or Peter were really attributable to God alone. So for the pope to announce a man to be a Saint on the grounds of something attributable to God we must question Rome’s beatification process.
What does the Bible say?
That should always be our question in all matters of faith, ‘what saith the scriptures’? Who does the Bible recognise as saints? Is there some class of extremely venerable super Christians classified as Saints in Scripture or is it a general term of reference to all believers?
In his first letter to the Corinthians the Apostle Paul uses a phrase that clearly indicates that all of the people making up the Church are saints. ‘For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.’ 1 Cor 14 v33 In fact Paul uses this term Saints literally scores of times when addressing the believers in the various churches to which he is writing, here are just two examples where in his opening Salutations to the Churches to which he writes he is clearly identifying the body of Christ in it’s entirety in that location as Saints.
‘Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:’ Ephesians 1 v1
‘To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’ Colossians 1 v2
The term is so tied up with believers in a local church that it must refer to all believers and not some super class of Christian as Rome would teach. Jude too in his little Epistle refers to the original body of believers that received the gospel all as saints. ‘Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.’ Later (v14) in the same letter Jude refers to Christ coming in judgement with ten thousands of his saints. Now I’m not sure how many Saints Rome claims to have but I don’t believe in runs into the tens of thousands.
Finally by way of evidence can I appeal to the description that John gives in the book of the Revelation, in Chapter 14 v12 the saints are seen as a group of people who have faith in Jesus. ‘Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.’
It is clear beyond argument that when the Scripture speaks of a Saint it speaks of a believer in Christ, a Child of God, a Christian. I am a Saint and I don’t need the pope to tell me that. God tells me in His word.
Once again the pope of Rome is trying to play God. This should not surprise us from an institution that claims to have the power to forgive sins, an act that God alone can do, even the Scribes of Jesus day knew enough to know that. Yet the priest of Rome claim this power in the confessional every day.
But there was certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, ‘Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.’ Mark Chapter 2 v7-12
I don't know about you but I'm sure glad Benny the Blasphemer has gone home to Rome. I trust it will a long time before his like returns to our shores again.
In order to be made a Saint by the Roman Catholic Church one must first be declared after their death to have been a ‘Servant of God’, then someone latter the person will be given the description of ‘venerable’, if then a miracle can be attributed to you, you are the well on your way to Sainthood. However, one miracle is not enough, there must be a second miracle that is clearly attributed to you and then you can be declared a Saint by the pope.
The second miracle attributed to Cardinal Newman was that of a man called Jack Sullivan who suffered from severe back pain due to a vertebrae on his lower back turning inwards and squeezing on his spine. He claims that he was healed after praying to Cardinal Newman for healing. I do not know enough about Mr Sullivan’s medical case to comment on the veracity of his claims for healing but I do not this, if he was healed it was nothing to do with Cardinal Newman it was all down to God graciously touching his infirmity. Even the miracles of the Bible carried out by Elijah or Peter were really attributable to God alone. So for the pope to announce a man to be a Saint on the grounds of something attributable to God we must question Rome’s beatification process.
What does the Bible say?
That should always be our question in all matters of faith, ‘what saith the scriptures’? Who does the Bible recognise as saints? Is there some class of extremely venerable super Christians classified as Saints in Scripture or is it a general term of reference to all believers?
In his first letter to the Corinthians the Apostle Paul uses a phrase that clearly indicates that all of the people making up the Church are saints. ‘For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.’ 1 Cor 14 v33 In fact Paul uses this term Saints literally scores of times when addressing the believers in the various churches to which he is writing, here are just two examples where in his opening Salutations to the Churches to which he writes he is clearly identifying the body of Christ in it’s entirety in that location as Saints.
‘Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:’ Ephesians 1 v1
‘To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.’ Colossians 1 v2
The term is so tied up with believers in a local church that it must refer to all believers and not some super class of Christian as Rome would teach. Jude too in his little Epistle refers to the original body of believers that received the gospel all as saints. ‘Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.’ Later (v14) in the same letter Jude refers to Christ coming in judgement with ten thousands of his saints. Now I’m not sure how many Saints Rome claims to have but I don’t believe in runs into the tens of thousands.
Finally by way of evidence can I appeal to the description that John gives in the book of the Revelation, in Chapter 14 v12 the saints are seen as a group of people who have faith in Jesus. ‘Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.’
It is clear beyond argument that when the Scripture speaks of a Saint it speaks of a believer in Christ, a Child of God, a Christian. I am a Saint and I don’t need the pope to tell me that. God tells me in His word.
Once again the pope of Rome is trying to play God. This should not surprise us from an institution that claims to have the power to forgive sins, an act that God alone can do, even the Scribes of Jesus day knew enough to know that. Yet the priest of Rome claim this power in the confessional every day.
But there was certain of the scribes sitting there, and reasoning in their hearts, ‘Why doth this man thus speak blasphemies? who can forgive sins but God only? And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned within themselves, he said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts? Whether is it easier to say to the sick of the palsy, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and take up thy bed, and walk? But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (he saith to the sick of the palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy bed, and go thy way into thine house. And immediately he arose, took up the bed, and went forth before them all; insomuch that they were all amazed, and glorified God, saying, We never saw it on this fashion.’ Mark Chapter 2 v7-12
I don't know about you but I'm sure glad Benny the Blasphemer has gone home to Rome. I trust it will a long time before his like returns to our shores again.
Friday, 17 September 2010
The Pope is a Thief
In one way I am sad because of the papal visit to my nation but in another way I am glad because it has caused me to once again focus on the Church of Rome and her doctrines and claims. So often we can become indifferent and complacent to the presence of this institution in our midst and the popes visit has given me reason to once again focus on these things.
I was reminded this morning as I listened to the media coverage of this visit of another one of the popes many titles, this one he has stolen form God Himself, I refer of course to his title ‘Holy Father’.
In the scriptures we only find this title being used once. In John chapter 17 we have what is termed the ‘High Priestly Prayer’ of our Lord Jesus Christ. As we approach John 17 we should really take our shoes off because we are standing on ‘holy ground’. This chapter is a record of the outpouring of the heart of our Saviour (the second person of the Godhead) to His Father (the first person of the Godhead). In verse 10 & 11 the Saviour utters these words.
‘And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.’
Right here in this passage the Lord Jesus refers to His Heavenly Father as ‘Holy Father’, who does the pope of Rome think he is stealing this Divine title?
Not only is it stealing for him to take this title but it is also a lie, for he in neither holy, nor a father (although with all Rome’s scandals you never know).
Holiness is an attribute that belongs to God alone, no man can be said to be holy for all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God, the scriptures call upon us to strive for holiness but we know that we can never attain it, that is why we need a Saviour to get into heaven.
With regard to the name father, has the Church of Rome forgotten what the Saviour said in Matthew 23 v 9 ‘And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.’ Even the very Priests of Rome want to be called ‘father’ in violation of this command.
How we need to pray more earnestly in these days for the masses of deluded Roman Catholics that are depending upon this system for their Salvation. We love them for Christ, our quarrel is not with them but with the system that blinds them.
I was reminded this morning as I listened to the media coverage of this visit of another one of the popes many titles, this one he has stolen form God Himself, I refer of course to his title ‘Holy Father’.
In the scriptures we only find this title being used once. In John chapter 17 we have what is termed the ‘High Priestly Prayer’ of our Lord Jesus Christ. As we approach John 17 we should really take our shoes off because we are standing on ‘holy ground’. This chapter is a record of the outpouring of the heart of our Saviour (the second person of the Godhead) to His Father (the first person of the Godhead). In verse 10 & 11 the Saviour utters these words.
‘And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them. And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.’
Right here in this passage the Lord Jesus refers to His Heavenly Father as ‘Holy Father’, who does the pope of Rome think he is stealing this Divine title?
Not only is it stealing for him to take this title but it is also a lie, for he in neither holy, nor a father (although with all Rome’s scandals you never know).
Holiness is an attribute that belongs to God alone, no man can be said to be holy for all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God, the scriptures call upon us to strive for holiness but we know that we can never attain it, that is why we need a Saviour to get into heaven.
With regard to the name father, has the Church of Rome forgotten what the Saviour said in Matthew 23 v 9 ‘And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.’ Even the very Priests of Rome want to be called ‘father’ in violation of this command.
How we need to pray more earnestly in these days for the masses of deluded Roman Catholics that are depending upon this system for their Salvation. We love them for Christ, our quarrel is not with them but with the system that blinds them.
Thursday, 16 September 2010
Brass Necks
I can't believe what I have just heard. As I was driving home from work listening to BBC radio they were covering the popes visit to Scotland. Just before the pope arrived at Glasgow's Bellahouston Park the Strathclyde Police Pipe Band started playing 'Amazing Grace' and then a choir began to sing the great old hymn. What a cheek, what does the Roman Church know about 'Amazing Grace'?
The Catholic Church teaches that in order to be saved one needs to be a member of her institution for it is God's way of dispensing Grace to the sinner. This Grace is dispensed they teach in a number of ways. To name a few, the rite of baptising an infant dispenses grace to child and the child is born again at this point, the rite of communion where the faithful chew their wafer God to get grace and at the end of their days they receive the last rites and another bit of Grace is dispensed. The problem with this drip feed of grace is this, no one actually knows if they have enough to out weight their many sins but as luck would have it if they die with an imbalance they can have their outstanding sins purged in Purgatory. There is nothing AMAZING about that.
On the other hand the Grace of God as found in the Bible is AMAZING! God saves the repentant sinner who trusts in Christ's finished work on Calvary plus nothing. Now that's AMAZING.
'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:Not of works, lest any man should boast.' Ephesians 2 v8-9
The Catholic Church teaches that in order to be saved one needs to be a member of her institution for it is God's way of dispensing Grace to the sinner. This Grace is dispensed they teach in a number of ways. To name a few, the rite of baptising an infant dispenses grace to child and the child is born again at this point, the rite of communion where the faithful chew their wafer God to get grace and at the end of their days they receive the last rites and another bit of Grace is dispensed. The problem with this drip feed of grace is this, no one actually knows if they have enough to out weight their many sins but as luck would have it if they die with an imbalance they can have their outstanding sins purged in Purgatory. There is nothing AMAZING about that.
On the other hand the Grace of God as found in the Bible is AMAZING! God saves the repentant sinner who trusts in Christ's finished work on Calvary plus nothing. Now that's AMAZING.
'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:Not of works, lest any man should boast.' Ephesians 2 v8-9
Lest we forget
It is always good to remember the past. In this part of the world people get very excited about remembering 1690 when King William of Orange defeated King James to establish the throne of Britain as a Protestant throne, on the other side of the religious fence others get very excited about remembering 1916 and the Easter rising when Ireland made it’s first attempt to gain independence from Britain.
We are not unique in this matter either, as any Texan will tell you ‘remember the Alamo and across the world most nations remember those who have fallen in the defence of their lands. When it comes to the Bible we are also encouraged to remember.
‘Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.’ Isaiah 46 v9
The Lord Jesus himself before his death instituted that memorial feast we know as the Lord’s Supper. ‘And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ (1st Cor 11 v24)
So remembering is an important thing and on this day when the pope of Rome has arrived in Scotland as part of his state visit to Britain I think we should call to remembrance the terrible crimes and cruelties that the Roman Church inflicted upon Protestants during the Reformation.
Where will we start you might ask for so many were butchered, burned and drowned one would hardly know where top start. Well perhaps seeing papa is in Scotland we could just take a moment to remember Patrick Hamilton the first Martyr in Scotland.
Patrick Hamilton was of noble birth and born in Glasgow in 1504, as a teenager he studied in Paris and it was here that he first came across the teaching of Martin Luther and the doctrine of Justification by Faith. On returning to Scotland he based himself at St Andrews where he lectured in the University and took every opportunity to communicate his new found faith. His preaching drew the attention of Roman Catholic Archbishop James Beaton who ordered that the young preacher should be tried for heresy. On hearing this Hamilton fled to Germany early in 1527 but returned later that same year and resumed his preaching.
In a subtle act he was invited to a conference at St Andrews where he was afforded to opportunity to preach for a month, this was done in order to gather evidence of his so called heretical views for a trial being planned by the Romanist leaders in Scotland. At length he was summoned before a council of bishops and clergy presided over by Archbishop Beaton. He was charged in all with 13 charges 7 of which were related to doctrines that he had outlined in his only book ‘Loci Communes’. The trial of course was a sham and he was found guilty of heresy and handed over to the secular powers to be burned at the stake on the 29th February 1528
The execution took place on the same day as the trial had concluded in order to ensure no rescue attempt could be planned. He burned from noon to 6pm that afternoon and his last words were similar to those of his Saviour ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit’. Sad as his death was it did light a fire in Scotland that swept the Reformation through that land and it was said by his enemies that the ‘reek of Patrick Hamilton infected all it blew on’.
Lest we forget, if Rome had her way she would do it again. Do not be sucked in by the smiley, friendly face of papa as he tours Britain this week, he heads up a system that hates Bible believers and would kill us again and in fact in some parts of the world where she dominates still is persecuting true children of God.
How we need fearless preachers like Patrick Hamilton in 2010. May the Lord raise up more like Patrick Hamilton in our day! Amen
We are not unique in this matter either, as any Texan will tell you ‘remember the Alamo and across the world most nations remember those who have fallen in the defence of their lands. When it comes to the Bible we are also encouraged to remember.
‘Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me.’ Isaiah 46 v9
The Lord Jesus himself before his death instituted that memorial feast we know as the Lord’s Supper. ‘And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.’ (1st Cor 11 v24)
So remembering is an important thing and on this day when the pope of Rome has arrived in Scotland as part of his state visit to Britain I think we should call to remembrance the terrible crimes and cruelties that the Roman Church inflicted upon Protestants during the Reformation.
Where will we start you might ask for so many were butchered, burned and drowned one would hardly know where top start. Well perhaps seeing papa is in Scotland we could just take a moment to remember Patrick Hamilton the first Martyr in Scotland.
Patrick Hamilton was of noble birth and born in Glasgow in 1504, as a teenager he studied in Paris and it was here that he first came across the teaching of Martin Luther and the doctrine of Justification by Faith. On returning to Scotland he based himself at St Andrews where he lectured in the University and took every opportunity to communicate his new found faith. His preaching drew the attention of Roman Catholic Archbishop James Beaton who ordered that the young preacher should be tried for heresy. On hearing this Hamilton fled to Germany early in 1527 but returned later that same year and resumed his preaching.
In a subtle act he was invited to a conference at St Andrews where he was afforded to opportunity to preach for a month, this was done in order to gather evidence of his so called heretical views for a trial being planned by the Romanist leaders in Scotland. At length he was summoned before a council of bishops and clergy presided over by Archbishop Beaton. He was charged in all with 13 charges 7 of which were related to doctrines that he had outlined in his only book ‘Loci Communes’. The trial of course was a sham and he was found guilty of heresy and handed over to the secular powers to be burned at the stake on the 29th February 1528
The execution took place on the same day as the trial had concluded in order to ensure no rescue attempt could be planned. He burned from noon to 6pm that afternoon and his last words were similar to those of his Saviour ‘Lord Jesus, receive my spirit’. Sad as his death was it did light a fire in Scotland that swept the Reformation through that land and it was said by his enemies that the ‘reek of Patrick Hamilton infected all it blew on’.
Lest we forget, if Rome had her way she would do it again. Do not be sucked in by the smiley, friendly face of papa as he tours Britain this week, he heads up a system that hates Bible believers and would kill us again and in fact in some parts of the world where she dominates still is persecuting true children of God.
How we need fearless preachers like Patrick Hamilton in 2010. May the Lord raise up more like Patrick Hamilton in our day! Amen
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Does the Church have a future?
This was the question under discussion on a television programme aired on Ulster Television last night at 11pm, needless to say this blogger recorded it and watched it this evening, 11pm is far too late for a 'school night'.
I was looking forward to watching the programme as I was informed that an Evangelical Preacher of my acquaintance was to take part as a member of the audience. Sadly my friend did not make it onto the programme, whether he did not get an opportunity to speak or whether he was edited out I don't know as yet but I shall find out.
That aside the programme made interesting viewing although I am not sure how representative the panel was of the Church. There was of course the representatives or Rome, with a Bishop and Roman Catholic lay person. It is not my place to judge but I would not be confident that either of them are part of the Body of Christ given that they are depending on the Church of Rome dispensing grace for their salvation rather than on the finished work of Christ at Calvary. There was a Bishop from the Anglican Communion and a (female) Presbyterian Minister representing the Established churches and a Baptist Pastor representing the Evangelicals.
With regard to the established Churches it is clear that there is a mixed multitude of the converted and unconverted, the Presbyterian lady even acknowledged this in her opening remarks. She was asked what was for her a tricky question about her moderator shaking hands with the pope. In trying to squirm through an answer she admitted that her church was very broad and had a lot of views. On that score she is right, there are certainly good men in her denomination who would appear to be soundly saved and therefore part of the visible church but there are also many liberals who deny the very doctrines of the gospel and it would be doubtful if they are saved and therefore members of Christ's church. The same can be said for all of the established churches.
I have said all of this to give weight to my view that I am not sure how representative this panel was or indeed how qualified they are to debate the future of the Church. They may all be qualified to talk about their churches/denominations but are they qualified to debate the future of Christ's Church.
Even thought the panel grappled with the issues of falling attendances and increased secularisation in society all of them seemed to be confident that the Church had a strong and vibrant future. Sad to say their optimism in the main was in themselves, for they kept talking about how they would listen more and reach out to the felt needs of their congregations and even those outside of their current sphere of influence.
I share their optimism for the future of the Church, not the church as they see but the true Church as Christ sees it. However, my optimism is not based on anything that the church is going to do, my optimism is based on what Christ has always done and will continue and as was pointed out by the lone voice of an evangelical in the audience of that programme:-
'I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.' Matthew 16 v 18
The Church does not need to listen to the felt needs of people in order to reach them, the Church knows what people need. They need a Saviour! That might not be what they feel they need but that is what the Bible says they need. In order to reach them with the Saviour then we must do what the Scriptures command us.
'Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.' 2 Timothy 4 v 2
'For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.' 1 Corinthians 1 v18
Away with all the fluffy nonsense, Preach the Word!
I was looking forward to watching the programme as I was informed that an Evangelical Preacher of my acquaintance was to take part as a member of the audience. Sadly my friend did not make it onto the programme, whether he did not get an opportunity to speak or whether he was edited out I don't know as yet but I shall find out.
That aside the programme made interesting viewing although I am not sure how representative the panel was of the Church. There was of course the representatives or Rome, with a Bishop and Roman Catholic lay person. It is not my place to judge but I would not be confident that either of them are part of the Body of Christ given that they are depending on the Church of Rome dispensing grace for their salvation rather than on the finished work of Christ at Calvary. There was a Bishop from the Anglican Communion and a (female) Presbyterian Minister representing the Established churches and a Baptist Pastor representing the Evangelicals.
With regard to the established Churches it is clear that there is a mixed multitude of the converted and unconverted, the Presbyterian lady even acknowledged this in her opening remarks. She was asked what was for her a tricky question about her moderator shaking hands with the pope. In trying to squirm through an answer she admitted that her church was very broad and had a lot of views. On that score she is right, there are certainly good men in her denomination who would appear to be soundly saved and therefore part of the visible church but there are also many liberals who deny the very doctrines of the gospel and it would be doubtful if they are saved and therefore members of Christ's church. The same can be said for all of the established churches.
I have said all of this to give weight to my view that I am not sure how representative this panel was or indeed how qualified they are to debate the future of the Church. They may all be qualified to talk about their churches/denominations but are they qualified to debate the future of Christ's Church.
Even thought the panel grappled with the issues of falling attendances and increased secularisation in society all of them seemed to be confident that the Church had a strong and vibrant future. Sad to say their optimism in the main was in themselves, for they kept talking about how they would listen more and reach out to the felt needs of their congregations and even those outside of their current sphere of influence.
I share their optimism for the future of the Church, not the church as they see but the true Church as Christ sees it. However, my optimism is not based on anything that the church is going to do, my optimism is based on what Christ has always done and will continue and as was pointed out by the lone voice of an evangelical in the audience of that programme:-
'I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.' Matthew 16 v 18
The Church does not need to listen to the felt needs of people in order to reach them, the Church knows what people need. They need a Saviour! That might not be what they feel they need but that is what the Bible says they need. In order to reach them with the Saviour then we must do what the Scriptures command us.
'Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long suffering and doctrine.' 2 Timothy 4 v 2
'For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.' 1 Corinthians 1 v18
Away with all the fluffy nonsense, Preach the Word!
Monday, 13 September 2010
Grand Claim
This week we see the first visit of a Roman Pontiff to the UK for three decades. Many in the Evangelical Christian community are directly opposed to such a visit and plan to protest against the Pontiff's arrival. As someone who blogged only last week about religious liberty it would be hypocritical of me to say I think his visit should be banned. However, my belief in Religious Liberty should not be confused with approval of the visit.
The fact that the Roman Pontiff is coming to my nation is a grief to my soul, I wish there was no pope, I wish there was no such system as Roman Catholicism, it is nothing more than a semi pagan religious cult that is responsible for the damnation of millions of souls.
The visit of the pope does give us opportunity to examine one of the 'Grand Claims' the pope's of Rome have been making for centuries. The pope as one of his official titles calls himself the 'Vicar of Christ'. In essence this title means that he takes the place of Christ, he of course does this by claiming to be the head of the church, this of course is the position that alone belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ, as Colossians 1 v 18 says 'He is the head of the body, the church'. For the pope to use this title he is usurping Christ and seeking to take His place.
If you don't believe what I am saying just examine the Latin root of the word 'vicar'. We are familiar with the term vicarious which means to take the place of another, the death of Christ is said to be vicarious because he died in the place of the sinner, he took their place. The word 'vicar' is essentially the same word with the same meaning, papa wants to take the place of Christ. Not only is his claim grand it is also blasphemous!
As an interesting aside there is a word from the Greek language with the same meaning as 'vicar' that word is 'anti'. Just think if the Vatican had employed Greek rather than Latin the popes title would have been 'anti-Christ'. Now before my many friends from the reformed tradition get too excited I am not saying that I believe that the pope is that man of sin spoken of in the book of Revelation but the pope is certainly an 'anti-Christ' for he seeks by his own claims and title to usurp our blessed Saviour, don't forget that the Apostle John has warned us that 'even now are there many antichrists''.
It is a sad time in the life of our nation that our Queen is welcoming this blasphemour on behalf of our nation, pray earnestly that this visit will be a PR disaster for Rome and that no more souls will be sucked into the influence of this man made religion.
The fact that the Roman Pontiff is coming to my nation is a grief to my soul, I wish there was no pope, I wish there was no such system as Roman Catholicism, it is nothing more than a semi pagan religious cult that is responsible for the damnation of millions of souls.
The visit of the pope does give us opportunity to examine one of the 'Grand Claims' the pope's of Rome have been making for centuries. The pope as one of his official titles calls himself the 'Vicar of Christ'. In essence this title means that he takes the place of Christ, he of course does this by claiming to be the head of the church, this of course is the position that alone belongs to the Lord Jesus Christ, as Colossians 1 v 18 says 'He is the head of the body, the church'. For the pope to use this title he is usurping Christ and seeking to take His place.
If you don't believe what I am saying just examine the Latin root of the word 'vicar'. We are familiar with the term vicarious which means to take the place of another, the death of Christ is said to be vicarious because he died in the place of the sinner, he took their place. The word 'vicar' is essentially the same word with the same meaning, papa wants to take the place of Christ. Not only is his claim grand it is also blasphemous!
As an interesting aside there is a word from the Greek language with the same meaning as 'vicar' that word is 'anti'. Just think if the Vatican had employed Greek rather than Latin the popes title would have been 'anti-Christ'. Now before my many friends from the reformed tradition get too excited I am not saying that I believe that the pope is that man of sin spoken of in the book of Revelation but the pope is certainly an 'anti-Christ' for he seeks by his own claims and title to usurp our blessed Saviour, don't forget that the Apostle John has warned us that 'even now are there many antichrists''.
It is a sad time in the life of our nation that our Queen is welcoming this blasphemour on behalf of our nation, pray earnestly that this visit will be a PR disaster for Rome and that no more souls will be sucked into the influence of this man made religion.
Thursday, 9 September 2010
Stumbling on Truth
From time to time the world unwittingly discovers a Biblical truth for itself and is often pleased with itself for doing so. I came across such an example to day as I was driving to work.
A young lady was being interviewed on BBC Radio 5 live. She had been doing some research to see if there were any health benefits derived from being kind e.g. giving gifts or doing someone a good turn. Her research indeed revealed that health benefits did in fact come out being kind.
The young lady was clearly very sincere but could have saved herself a lot of time and effort if she had just read the Bible.
'I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.' Acts 20 v35
Once again the Bible is vindicated!
A young lady was being interviewed on BBC Radio 5 live. She had been doing some research to see if there were any health benefits derived from being kind e.g. giving gifts or doing someone a good turn. Her research indeed revealed that health benefits did in fact come out being kind.
The young lady was clearly very sincere but could have saved herself a lot of time and effort if she had just read the Bible.
'I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.' Acts 20 v35
Once again the Bible is vindicated!
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Religious Liberty
Usually when I blog I have a fair idea that what I am saying would be generally accepted in Evangelical circles, but with what I am about to say I am not just sure what people will think.
A couple of recent news stories to have come out of the United States have caught my attention, first of all there was the uproar regarding the building of an Islamic centre close to the site of the September 11th attacks and then only today I have heard reports of an Evangelical Church in the US state of Florida that is planning a book burning of copies of the Koran to mark the anniversary of the September 11th attacks on the world trade centre.
In the first instance can I clarify my position on Islam. Islam is a false religion that is both repulsive in its beliefs and practices as well as the fact that is damning the souls of Millions of it's adherents to hell. It is wrong, I have no time for it, the Koran is poisonous nonsense and it grieves me to my very core that mosques and Islamic centres are springing up all over the western world, however, as a believer in religious liberty I do not believe I have any right to suppress those who want to practice Islam for themselves. As long as a Muslim obeys the laws of the land he or she should be as free as the next person to worship as they wish.
If anyone should know about religious liberty it is the people of the USA, the land of the free. The pilgrim fathers who left Europe to settle America were often motivated by a desire to practice their beliefs free from interference from others. The largest Protestant denomination in America is the Baptist denomination. Baptist history in Europe is very interesting, the Baptists were like all true believers persecuted by the Roman Catholic church to a terrible degree and sad to say the Protestant Reformers even persecuted them as well. As a result many made their way to the new world as it was termed and a nation of free and tolerant people was formed and flourished.
It seems some of our American cousins have forgotten their history and now want to do unto others as was done unto their forefathers. I understand their animosity towards a religious system that hates them and their way of life, I don't like Islam either, but, we should not adopt the approach of denying Muslims religious liberty. They might burn Union Flags, Stars and Stripes, Effigies of Western leaders and even Bibles in Islamabad, but we should not stoop to their Fascist bully tactics. We should be better than that after all we are living by a higher code.
'And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.' Luke 10 v27
'Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.' Matthew 5 v 43-45
Just think, if we actually did what the Lord Jesus said maybe we would have more success in winning these lost souls for the Kingdom of Heaven.
A couple of recent news stories to have come out of the United States have caught my attention, first of all there was the uproar regarding the building of an Islamic centre close to the site of the September 11th attacks and then only today I have heard reports of an Evangelical Church in the US state of Florida that is planning a book burning of copies of the Koran to mark the anniversary of the September 11th attacks on the world trade centre.
In the first instance can I clarify my position on Islam. Islam is a false religion that is both repulsive in its beliefs and practices as well as the fact that is damning the souls of Millions of it's adherents to hell. It is wrong, I have no time for it, the Koran is poisonous nonsense and it grieves me to my very core that mosques and Islamic centres are springing up all over the western world, however, as a believer in religious liberty I do not believe I have any right to suppress those who want to practice Islam for themselves. As long as a Muslim obeys the laws of the land he or she should be as free as the next person to worship as they wish.
If anyone should know about religious liberty it is the people of the USA, the land of the free. The pilgrim fathers who left Europe to settle America were often motivated by a desire to practice their beliefs free from interference from others. The largest Protestant denomination in America is the Baptist denomination. Baptist history in Europe is very interesting, the Baptists were like all true believers persecuted by the Roman Catholic church to a terrible degree and sad to say the Protestant Reformers even persecuted them as well. As a result many made their way to the new world as it was termed and a nation of free and tolerant people was formed and flourished.
It seems some of our American cousins have forgotten their history and now want to do unto others as was done unto their forefathers. I understand their animosity towards a religious system that hates them and their way of life, I don't like Islam either, but, we should not adopt the approach of denying Muslims religious liberty. They might burn Union Flags, Stars and Stripes, Effigies of Western leaders and even Bibles in Islamabad, but we should not stoop to their Fascist bully tactics. We should be better than that after all we are living by a higher code.
'And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.' Luke 10 v27
'Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.' Matthew 5 v 43-45
Just think, if we actually did what the Lord Jesus said maybe we would have more success in winning these lost souls for the Kingdom of Heaven.
Monday, 6 September 2010
Blasphemy on an Industrial Scale
I have listened with sadness over the past number of years to the increasing popularisation of a phrase which so pervades our 21st Century society that even very young children are using it. The phrase that I am referring to is 'Oh My God'.
'Oh My God' seems to have become the general term used by someone who is shocked or surprised in any way. It is a phrase that I have always heard people use from time to time but not to the same extent as it is used today. I think it was brought to the fore in American sitcoms of the 90's and noughties and now it can even be heard in television programmes for older children. As a result it is now part of common parlance, even for the very young. There is even an abbreviated form on txt messages and social networking sites where people use 'omg'.
There is only one problem. It's blasphemy and in direct disobedience to the commandment of God, the one whose name is being used.
'Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.' Exodus 20 v7
Sad to say like many aspects of popular culture this phrase has infiltrated even God's own people and Christians are using the name of their God in an inappropriate and dishonouring way. Let is take a stand in these days against Blasphemy on an Industrial Scale.
'I will praise thee, O Lord my God, with all my heart: and I will glorify thy name for evermore.' Psalm 86 v12
'Oh My God' seems to have become the general term used by someone who is shocked or surprised in any way. It is a phrase that I have always heard people use from time to time but not to the same extent as it is used today. I think it was brought to the fore in American sitcoms of the 90's and noughties and now it can even be heard in television programmes for older children. As a result it is now part of common parlance, even for the very young. There is even an abbreviated form on txt messages and social networking sites where people use 'omg'.
There is only one problem. It's blasphemy and in direct disobedience to the commandment of God, the one whose name is being used.
'Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.' Exodus 20 v7
Sad to say like many aspects of popular culture this phrase has infiltrated even God's own people and Christians are using the name of their God in an inappropriate and dishonouring way. Let is take a stand in these days against Blasphemy on an Industrial Scale.
'I will praise thee, O Lord my God, with all my heart: and I will glorify thy name for evermore.' Psalm 86 v12
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
