General Richard Dannatt, until his retirement Britain's Chief of the General Staff, is a committed Christian.
Writing in the Guardian, he says the military needs to have not only good leadership and sound morals, but a spiritual dimension to sustain the soldiers. He quotes a British private who had just shot his first enemy fighter in Afghanistan:
"Afterwards, I sat there and I thought 'Hang on. I just shot someone.' I had a brew and that. I didn't get to sleep that night. I just lay there all night thinking, 'I shot someone.' It's something strange. A really strange feeling. You feel like, you know, a bit happy with yourself - I've done me job, it's what I've come here for, know what I mean? He's Taliban and I've got one of them. You feel quite chuffed about it.
"Then you're feeling like, you know, well you know, sad. You're thinking. . . well, you know. . . you know, the, the geezer's another human being at the end of the day, like. Then you get the feeling, well, you know, it's either him or me. And then you're thinking. . .
"I think people get, like, you know, religious then as well. You're thinking, well, in the bigger picture, if there is a Geezer up there and a Geezer downstairs, what does that mean to me now I've just shot someone? Is that me done for? Am I going to hell or what? And all of that went through me mind that night, for hour after hour after hour."
Young soldiers may not understand the politics that led to war or the ethical considerations involved in their doing what they're doing. They may not have a Christian background, but they still have, it seems, an awareness of the value of human life.
Asia Bibi lives in Pakistan. She is a wife and the mother of five children. She is also a Christian.
One day she went out to work in the fields with some other women, who were Muslims. She is said to have drawn water for them, which they refused to drink because they said it was contaminated by having been handled by a Christian. They tried to convert her to Islam, but she stood up for her faith in Christ. The women said she made a disparaging remark about the prophet Mohammed; this she denies.
Asia was taken to court, charged with blasphemy against the prophet, and sentenced to death by hanging.
The Muslim cleric in Asia's home town has promised if Pakistan does not execute her, he will kill her himself. Another cleric has promised a $6,000 reward to anyone who murders her. Asia is kept in solitary confinement in case she is attacked in prison. Her family is in hiding.
A government minister, Shahbaz Bhatti, a Catholic, who spoke up for Asia, was shot dead by Muslim extremists. Punjab governor Salman Taseer, who called for a pardon for Asia, was shot dead by one of his bodyguards. The judge at the trial of the bodyguard had threats on his life and was forced to leave the country.
It is a year since Asia was condemned. She has appealed against the conviction, but it may be years before her appeal is heard. Her case became known abroad, and many outside Pakistan have complained to the Pakistani authorities. If her sentence is commuted, there will be uproar in Pakistan. If she is executed, there will be indignation abroad.
Meanwhile, Asia Bibi languishes in a tiny cell, still under sentence of death, a victim of Islam and religious hatred.
Patients in so-called persistent vegetative state are awake, but according to doctors, unaware. (I dislike using the expression vegetative state. No human being is ever a vegetable. Vegetables are things you can throw away.)
According to a study published in the medical journal the Lancet, new research at Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, and University Hospital in Liege, Belgium, shows that despite rigorous assessment, many patients said to be in PVS are misdiagnosed.
Previous studies have shown that fMRI scans can uncover awareness in apparently vegetative patients, but such scans are not always available and can produce confusing results. The new research used "a considerably cheaper and more portable technique" - an EEG machine, which records brainwaves - on 16 patients diagnosed as being in PVS.
Although they were unable to move their limbs physically, the patients were told to imagine moving their right hand and toes. Three patients produced repeated and reliable brainwave patterns which showed they were aware of the commands and responding to them.
Judges in UK courts have given permission for food and water to be withdrawn from more than 40 PVS patients, causing their lives to be ended.
Here is the question: how many patients dehydrated to death have been aware but unable to respond?
And here is another question: will the knowledge that some patients are awake and aware prevent this happening in the future?
American bioethicist Wesley J. Smith agrees with me about the expression persistent vegetative state, which he says should be changed to "persistent unconscious state." The v-word, he argues, "demeans, diminishes, dehumanises and degrades the moral value of the patient."
And don't think, he says, that learning a patient is conscious will lead many to advocate against their dehydration. Although permission to dehydrate a minimally conscious patient was recently refused in a case in the UK, many have argued that someone being minimally conscious is even more reason to pull the plug because they will be suffering from the potential knowledge of their limitations.
"We really need to change our values," he says, "so that all of us are embraced and accepted as moral equals regardless of our cognitive states."
We've all seen signs outside churches bearing messages varying from "WHAT'S MISSING IN THIS CH__CH?" to "SEVEN PRAYERLESS DAYS MAKE ONE WEAK." (I would have thought it would have taken considerably fewer than that.)
Are such signs effective?
The Gadsden Times reports on one church that thinks so. The church is situated at the side of a busy road, and 32,680 vehicles pass by each day.
People to whom the church is mentioned say "Oh, I know your church. I read your sign every day." One man recounted with tears in his eyes how when he was getting a good old telling-off from his wife, he remembered reading on the sign "MEEKNESS IS NOT WEAKNESS" and managed not to lose his temper. A woman on her way to commit suicide read a message on the sign which said simply "HANG IN THERE!" and abandoned her suicide attempt.
If you wanted to have such a sign, where would you get all the sayings to put on it? Apparently if you google "church sign sayings," you'll get hundreds. One site here has more than a thousand. Enough to keep you going for ages.
How about "PRAYER IS THE PLACE WHERE BURDENS CHANGE SHOULDERS," "A BIBLE THAT'S FALLING APART USUALLY BELONGS TO SOMEONE WHO ISN'T," and "IT'S NOT TOO LATE. JESUS IS WAITING"?
Here's a story to encourage you. Or put you off your breakfast, depending how you're feeling this morning. To encourage you, I hope.
Everett Penrod is an American. He was ordained to the ministry in 1942, became a US Army chaplain, served in North Africa, Sicily, Italy, the Korean war and the war in Vietnam.
He has written 13 Bible-based novels. He teaches a Bible class at a local church. He's a trained pilot. Flying, he says, is one of his favourite hobbies.
For 35 years he competed in athletics. He had to give that up while he had hip and knee replacements and recovered from a brain injury - a subdural haematoma - sustained in a car crash. He got back on the athletics track last year.
Last month he joined 10,000 others in the World Senior Games in St George, Utah, where he won four gold medals and set two new world records for his age group in the 50 and 100 metres.
By the way, he's 96 years old.
"Usually when a competitor sets a record, the judges will test you for steroid use," he says. "When I finished the race and set a record, the judges didn't test me." He asked them why. "They said at my age I needed steroids."
Everett intends to continue running, he says, "if the wind isn't too strong."
That doughty defender of marriage and the family, Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith, insists it is important that people understand the difference between living together and marriage.
He says a live-in relationship is more likely to break down than a marriage relationship. He blames broken homes for funnelling children into the gangs that ran rampant during the summer riots, and says failure to support marriage will lead to further social breakdown.
Research by the Jubilee Centre based on published data covering 14,103 households and 22,265 adults supports his view. That research showed couples who lived together before marriage were 15 per cent more likely to divorce, and those who had previously lived with a different partner were around 45 per cent more likely to divorce.
Although the average length of unmarried relationships rose from two-and-a-half years to three-and-a-half years between the 1980s and the 2000s, fewer than one in four unmarried couples lived together for more than six-and-a-half years. Couples living together at the birth of their first child were six times more likely than married couples to split up by the time the child was five and four times more likely by the time the child was 16.
Norman Wells, of the Family Education Trust, says when a couple marry, they make a lifelong commitment to each other in the presence of witnesses. A "trial lifelong commitment," he says, is a contradiction in terms.
Prime Minister David Cameron has said he supports a change in the law to allow homosexuals to marry. ComRes, commissioned by Premier Christian Media, asked churchgoers at the end of October if they support or oppose the Government's proposal to legalise same-sex marriage.
The results show that of 544 interviewed, 11 per cent supported the proposal and 83 per cent opposed. Six per cent didn't know. Fifty-seven per cent indicated that as a result, they would be less likely to vote Conservative in future.
Commentators are pointing out that one per cent of the UK population identifies itself as homosexual, and some five million people are regular churchgoers. If David Cameron is risking alienating 57 per cent of them, they say, that's a pretty poor political decision.
UK equalities minister Lynne Featherstone has announced that by the end of the year there will be a system in place to allow same-sex civil partnership ceremonies to be conducted on religious premises. There will be no delay, it seems, for the implementation of an item on the homosexual agenda.
The Church of England says it will not bless same-sex couples. The Roman Catholic Church is opposed to the move. Evidently a tiny minority of churches is to be used to set an example to the others.
Miss Featherstone says no churches will be compelled to perform same-sex services; to do so will be voluntary. There will be an "opt-in" system for churches wanting to take part.
No doubt when the system is in place homosexual activists will sue churches not willing to take part on grounds of discrimination and courts will be keen to uphold anti-discrimination laws.
Andrea Williams, of Christian Concern, puts it well: "We have no doubt about what will happen. Churches will inevitably be coerced into performing these ceremonies, and those who don't will be vilified and sued. Nobody will seriously believe the Government's assurances to the contrary, given the way in which previous assurances on civil partnerships have been shattered."
The day may not be too far off when ministers not willing to perform same-sex partnership ceremonies in church will have to resign - or face the full weight of the law.
Churches, wake up.
The Scottish Government has launched a consultation on the possible introduction of same-sex marriage and the possibility of allowing religious ceremonies for civil partnerships. It says that while no decisions have been taken, "The Government's initial view is that marriage should be open to both same sex couples and opposite sex couples. . . It is clear that some same sex couples would prefer marriage to a civil partnership, as the appropriate way to declare and formalise their commitment to each other."
The consultation closes on December 9.
One of my daughters obtained contraception from the school nurse when she was only 14 after being heavily pressured by her then boyfriend, Jo Simpson writes in the Family Education Trust's Bulletin.
I knew nothing about this for over three years until she told me about it a few months ago. We have had numerous conversations this year, and my daughter (now 18) is convinced that making contraception available to pupils on school premises puts pressure on them to have sex.
If contraception had not been available at school, she feels there is no way she would have gone to the doctors or to the chemist to get contraception and therefore would not have given into the pressure she was under. She subsequently ended the relationship with her boyfriend and has carried the regret of not waiting ever since.
I am deeply concerned that people who are strangers to our children are able to give them contraception without the consent of their parents and without our children being able to fully understand the possible consequences of what they are doing. Sex is a life-changing and a life bringing act. There is no condom on earth that will protect a child from a bad reputation or a broken heart, or prevent regret. . .
Sex education in schools needs to be looked at in conjunction with the sexualisation of children. It amazes me how the government makes decisions that are only serving to fragment the family further and further, and destroying society's foundations.
Although the Government has said that it has no plans to change the law on sex education, it is under pressure from both MPs and peers to make sex education compulsory from the beginning of primary school and to remove or limit the right of parents to withdraw their children from sex education lessons.
People have just until the end of the month to take part in the Department of Education's consultation on PSHE (personal, social, health and economic) education, including sex and relationships education. They can point out, if they wish, that sex education should not be compulsory in primary schools and all schools should be free to decide how sex education is provided in consultation with parents.
Details of the consultation can be found here. A briefing paper can be found here. Responses must be received by November 30.
New rumours of an imminent Israeli strike against nuclear installations in Iran were flying everywhere this week, fuelled by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's speaking to the Israeli Government about the threat from Iran, a rush of activity by Israel's military forces and the US publicly seeking to dissuade Israel from making the first strike.
Then it was said that the US was organising an attempt by the US, Britain and Israel to persuade Iran that an attack could become a reality if Iran does not give up its drive for a nuclear weapon. It is reported that soon Iran will have all its nuclear facilities deep underground where they will be invulnerable to attack.
Finally, it was suggested that Israel is preparing to defend itself against the fallout from a possible US-backed NATO attack on Syria aimed at deposing Syria's President Assad. Assad has threatened that if Syria is attacked he will attack Israel, creating a wider conflict that would make it more difficult to topple his regime. Syria has tens of thousands of missiles capable of striking anywhere in Israel.
The Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon similarly has tens of thousands of rockets ready for use against Israel; Hamas terrorists, sworn to Israel's destruction, are armed to the teeth in Gaza.
"If I had to summarise what will happen in our region, I would use two terms: instability and uncertainty," Prime Minister Netanyahu told his parliamentary colleagues on Monday.
Palestinians in Gaza fired a barrage of rockets at civilian targets in southern Israel in the past week, with 35 missiles falling in one day. They were using a Grad multiple rocket launcher believed brought from Libya. They are reported to have obtained others from the same place.
From the time the alarm sounds, Israelis have just 15 seconds to find shelter. Young children are particularly liable to emotional damage from the constant threat of incoming missiles.
There have been some remarkable escapes from death and injury in rocket attacks. One school has been turned into a makeshift synagogue for Sabbath services every Saturday for 40 years. Last Saturday the man whose job it was to open up was in hospital, so there was no service. When it would normally have been busy, the empty school was hit.
"It was a miracle," said one congregant. "People should come to see what a great miracle it was."
Others were not so fortunate. One man was killed and others injured.
Catalyst, a magazine published by CARE, the Christian charity, tells how Robin Mark, the Christian worship leader and songwriter, had a tough-looking character with a skinhead haircut march up to him at a Belfast conference.
Robin began to wonder if his number was up. "I honestly thought this was going to be an aggressive encounter," he said.
The skinhead demanded to know if he had written the song Not By Might. Robin admitted that he had. "I want to thank you," said the man. His wife had died and he had felt suicidal. The song had pulled him back from the brink.
"That song," he said, his eyes filled with tears, "has saved my life." Then he turned and walked off.
God wants to use every one who belongs to Him. Sometimes He lets us know when it's happened. Often He doesn't. That's a good thing; otherwise we would begin to think it was us, and it isn't. It's just God's grace working through us.
It's not easy being a Christian. There are a lot of hard things to go through. But one day, when we see it all and understand, we'll say "It was worth it. Oh yes, it was worth it."
The day my girlfriend told me she was three months pregnant I was absolutely devastated. She had already told her parents, now I had to tell mine. I made sure Dad wasn't around when I told Mum, hoping that she would understand. When Dad arrived home Mum told him my girlfriend was pregnant. By the time I got home they had already been to see my girlfriend's parents to discuss the situation my girlfriend and I had got ourselves into. Together our parents decided that an abortion would be the best for all concerned.
My girlfriend and I were both 17 years old and didn't have a clue what to do about the problem we had. My Mum assured me that it wasn't a baby but just a piece of lifeless tissue, shaped like a kidney. I now know that at three months the baby was fully formed in every detail, completely individual to any other human being, never again to be duplicated.
I spent the next few days convincing myself that my life would have been ruined if I had had a baby to support. Besides, I wanted a bigger and better motor bike than I already had. I had my whole life ahead of me. I wasn't going to let a baby spoil everything for me.
I don't think my girlfriend really wanted to have the abortion, but I talked her round to everybody else's point of view. Our parents made arrangements for the abortion at the Hazel Grove clinic.
The day my girlfriend went for the abortion I was at work. I was feeling all kinds of emotions. I was feeling guilty, but at the same time relieved. To make matters worse, when my girlfriend got back from the clinic she went hysterical at me. She was feeling guilty and sick at what we had done. For months after she would break down with bouts of uncontrollable sobbing.
I had no answers for her; I felt as guilty as she did. She used to count the weeks and months up to the time when the baby would have been born. The week the child should have been born was the worst. We were sitting in my bedroom talking and she began to sob again, mourning the loss of our child.
I have a poem she wrote that night. Unknown to her I kept it and it haunted me for years.
THE POEM
I love my little baby,
But he's not here at the moment!
Because he's been dumped in a dustbin,
Somewhere,
Poor little thing,
He would have been born in about a week,
I wish I'd kept him.
There's nothing more I can say about abortion that the poem doesn't say; except that abortion is not just a woman's issue because it also affects men. It is only because of Christ's great love and mercy that I know I have now been forgiven and set free from the guilt I had suppressed for so many years.
Next Thursday, October 27, is the National Day of Prayer about abortion. Seven million babies have been aborted in the UK since abortion was decriminalised. Ninety-eight per cent of abortions are for social reasons. One per cent are because of suspected disability.
The day of prayer is organised by Image, a Christian pro-life organisation. While I was thinking about the day, I came across the testimony above in an Image publication.
People are asked to arrange some prayer on the day. Would you be able to do that?
Details of the day, free prayer guides and a PowerPoint presentation can be downloaded here.
Abby Johnson started work at an abortion clinic in America's lone star state because she cared about women in crisis and wanted to do the right thing.
She believed the purpose of Planned Parenthood, whose clinic it was, was to prevent unwanted pregnancies, thus reducing the number of abortions, and that the organisation saved the lives of women who otherwise might resort to some back-alley abortionist.
She worked there for eight years, eventually as clinic director. Then one day, because of a staff shortage, she was asked to assist in an abortion. Unusually, it was an abortion guided by ultrasound.
On the ultrasound screen she saw a 13-week-old baby - head, arms, legs, even tiny fingers and toes. The baby started kicking, as though trying to move away from the probe, struggling to turn and twist away. Then it crumpled. Finally, it was gone.
"Then it hit me. . . It wasn't just tissue, just cells. It was a human baby. And it was fighting for its life. . . What I have told people for years, what I've believed and taught and defended, is a lie. . .
"This thought came from deep within me: Never again."
Abby resigned from the clinic. Planned Parenthood went to court for a gagging order preventing her from speaking about her work at the clinic. The judge threw out the application. Abby is now a pro-life activist.
This month is the second anniversary of her leaving the abortion industry. She writes:
"I am a better mother, a better wife, a better friend, and a new creation in Christ. These two years have been the best of my life. . . My marriage is better than it has ever been.
"I never realized how the evil of my job had crept into my life at home. Now we are free of that. I value my daughter more than I ever have. I never really saw motherhood as a gift; now I am able to see that it is the greatest gift we are given as women.
"So many of my friends are still there, in those clinics. People that won't communicate with me anymore. Good people who are misdirected. I am now the enemy. . . I feel broken for all of those that are still caught in the justification of the abortion industry."
British Government ministers appear willingly blind to the threat from militant Islam.
A radical group, Muslims Against the Crusades, has launched a campaign to turn areas of Britain - Birmingham, Bradford, Derby, Dewsbury, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Luton, Manchester, Sheffield and Waltham Forest and Tower Hamlets in London - into Muslim enclaves ruled by sharia law and outside British jurisprudence.
According to the Sunday Telegraph, intelligence chiefs have warned Government ministers that 2,000 extremists based in Britain are actively planning terrorist activity of some kind, and 200, at a conservative estimate, are planning suicide bombings in Britain.
While the threat from militant Islam grows, non-Christians seem unable to understand why Christians in the West provide so little support for persecuted Christians elsewhere. In countries under Islamic rule, countless Christians have been massacred or caused to flee while Western churches have stood by apparently unconcerned.
It was announced a few days ago that the British Government is cutting overseas aid to countries where homosexuals are persecuted. Persecuted Christians, apparently, don't count.
Respected Israeli commentator Caroline Glick points out that a decade ago there were 800,000 Christians in Iraq. Today there are 150,000.
When the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994, Christians made up 80 per cent of Bethlehem's population. Today they are less than 20 per cent. Since Hamas "liberated" Gaza in 2007, Christian churches, convents, book stores and libraries in Gaza have been burned and Christians killed and assaulted. No one has been arrested for anti-Christian violence.
In 1946 the majority of Lebanese were Christian. Today, less than 30 per cent are Christian. In Turkey, the Christian population has dwindled from two million at the end of World War I to less than 100,000 today.
In Syria, Christians once made up nearly half the population. Today four per cent of Syrians are Christian. In Jordan half a century ago 18 per cent of the population was Christian; today, two per cent.
"Sadly for the Christians of the Islamic world," she says, "their cause is not being championed either by Western governments or Western Christians. . . Aside from Evangelical Protestants, most Western churches are. . . uninterested in defending the rights of their co-religionists in the Islamic world. . .
"Instead, over the past decade these churches and their related international bodies have made repeated efforts to attack the only country in the Middle East in which the Christian population has increased in the past 60 years - Israel. . .
"It is unclear what either Western governments or Western churches think they are achieving by turning a blind eye to the persecution and decimation of Christian communities in the Muslim world. As Sunday's events in Egypt and other daily anti-Christian attacks by Muslims against Christians throughout the region show, their behaviour is not appeasing anyone. What is clear enough is that they shall reap what they sow."
Last Sunday more than a thousand Coptic Christians dared to stage what was supposed to be a peaceful protest in Cairo. They were protesting violent state-supported attacks on Christians by Muslim groups and the recent burning of churches.
It was not long before they were attacked by angry Muslims and by the army. They were beaten, shot and dragged through the streets. Two armoured vehicles belonging to the army drove into the crowds of unarmed demonstrators, going backwards and forwards, mowing people under their wheels. What some eye-witnesses saw was so horrific that I would not want to repeat it here.
Between 20 and 40 Copts were killed and hundreds wounded. Some were dragged into dark alleys to be dealt with. One had his throat cut.
Egyptian authorities put out a report that soldiers were being killed by Copts. The report was later discredited. It was said that no soldiers had died.
The US President issued a statement expressing concern for "the tragic loss of life among demonstrators and security forces" and appealing to "all parties" to refrain from violence.
Said one commentator: "Perhaps I ought to join the president in his concern and call for restraint. I call upon the security forces to refrain from killing Christians, and upon Christians to refrain from dying."
As another pointed out, the Muslim spring in the Middle East is a Christian winter.
How could such a thing happen as happened in Cairo on Sunday? Mark Durie explains that Islam demands that a state be ruled by sharia law, which demands that non-Muslims live under dhimmi status.
"The 'crime' of the Copts in Aswan province was simply that they wished to repair their church. This is opposed by the (theological) logic of the dhimma pact, which states that non-Muslims are not allowed to repair places of worship, on pain of being treated as 'people of defiance and rebellion,' from whom 'safety and protection' have been withdrawn. In other words, such a person can be killed and their belongings plundered (because they are entitled to no protection under Islamic law).
"For some pious Muslims in Egypt today, the act of repairing a church is a flagrant provocation, a breach of the peace, which amounts to a deliberate revocation of one's rights to exist in the land. This becomes a legitimate topic for sermons in the mosque, as the faithful are urged to use their hands to defend the honor of Islam. It is seen as no injustice, and even a duty, to destroy the church and even the lives of Christians who have the temerity to repair their churches. Likewise those who go to the streets to protest church destruction are also rebels who have forfeited their rights to 'safety and protection.'"
Melanie Phillips wonders if Messrs Obama and Cameron realise what they have helped unleash by promoting the removal from office of Egypt's President Mubarak. It is hard to know, she says, which is the more terrifying - the malevolence displayed by the West towards Israel, or its sheer craven stupidity.
William Lane Craig is research professor of philosophy at Talbot Theological College in California. He is also a renowned Christian apologist who has debated some of the world's best known atheists. He comes to England this month to lecture on the rational grounds for the truth of Christianity and to debate the existence of God with leading atheists.
He will speak between October 17 and 26 in public meetings in London, Birmingham, Manchester, Cambridge, Oxford and Southampton. You can find details of his meetings at www.premier.org.uk/craig.
Atheist Sam Harris describes Craig as "the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into my fellow atheists." Professor Richard Dawkins, arguably Britain's best known atheist, has declined to debate with him, and offered a variety of weak excuses for doing so.
(Newspaper columnist and president of the British Humanist Association Polly Toynbee agreed, to many people's surprise, to debate him in London, but later withdrew, saying "I hadn't realised the nature of Mr Lane Craig's debating style, and having now looked at his previous performances, this is not my kind of forum.")
The invitation to Richard Dawkins to a public debate in Oxford remains open. If he fails to turn up on the night, the meeting will go ahead, but an empty chair will be placed on the platform and allowed to remain there through the meeting.
You may remember that two years ago increasingly aggressive British atheists paid for posters on the sides of buses saying "THERE'S PROBABLY NO GOD. NOW STOP WORRYING AND ENJOY YOUR LIFE."
The organisers of the meeting in Oxford have now put posters on the sides of Oxford buses saying "THERE'S PROBABLY NO DAWKINS. NOW STOP WORRYING AND ENJOY OCT 25TH AT THE SHELDONIAN THEATRE."
I like it.
Prayer is not just asking for things. Whatever else prayer is, prayer is also spending time with your closest, dearest Friend.The Song of Solomon says (in the King James Version of the Bible): "O my dove, that art in the clefts of the rock, in the secret places of the stairs, let me see thy countenance, let me hear thy voice; for sweet is thy voice, and thy countenance is comely."The Song of Solomon is a love story between the king and a Shulamite maiden. The king and the maiden have secret places on the stairs where they can meet to be together. He longs to see her and to hear her voice.
The Song of Solomon is also an allegory of the spiritual relationship between the Christian believer and her Lord. Imagine the Shulamite maiden is the believer and the king is the Lord Jesus.
If you are a believer, you have a secret place where you can meet with Him. The secret place is on the stairs. There may be steps to climb to reach it.
You may have family responsibilities which make it difficult. When you try to get there, the telephone rings, the baby cries and there's a knock at the door. Suddenly, you're desperately tired and your mind is filled with all manner of things.
You want to be there, because you want to be with Him. But did you know that He is longing to see you, longing to hear your voice? "Let me hear your voice," He says, "for your voice is sweet, and your countenance is lovely."
Here's the wonderful thing. He's the Creator of the universe. All things were made by Him, the Bible says; without Him was not anything made that was made. And you're just you.
But every time you go to meet Him in the secret place, He's there, waiting.
A recently published study of the parents of Down's syndrome children revealed that:
* 99 per cent said they loved their Down's syndrome son or daughter
* 97 per cent said they were proud of their Down's child
* 79 per cent felt their outlook on life was more positive because of him or her
* 95 per cent felt their other children had a good relationship with him or her
* 84 per cent felt their other children were more caring and sensitive to others because of him or her
* Five per cent were embarrassed by their Down's child and four per cent regretted having a child with Down's.
One parent said: "I've learned the good lessons of patience and that its rewards are a smile - and that is always enough." Another said: "Our son is the greatest joy and motivation of our lives." Said a third: "What at first appears to be the worst possible thing that could be happening can turn into the best possible thing."
Of brothers and sisters (12 years old or older) of Down's syndrome children, 96 per cent said they liked their Down's sibling; 94 per cent said they were proud of him or her; and 88 per cent said they were a better person because of him or her.
But now note the following facts:
More than 90 per cent of unborn babies with Down's syndrome are aborted. To put it another way, three babies are aborted every day in England and Wales because of Down's syndrome. Tests now being perfected which will enable Down's to be identified in the early weeks of pregnancy simply by examining a blood sample from the mother are expected to increase the number of abortions of Down's babies still further.
There were 2,044 responses in the survey mentioned above. The study's authors, Dr Brian Skotko of the Children's Hospital in Boston, USA, and colleagues, concluded that the parents' decision to abort the Down's syndrome baby or to continue with the pregnancy can depend on the information provided by their health care providers. And mothers reported that the information they received was oftentimes inaccurate, inadequate, and in the worst cases, offensive.
Will somebody please take some notice?
You may be aware that the BBC's religious and ethics department (whose head is a Muslim) has suggested broadcasters replace the terms BC and AD (Before Christ and Anno Domini), when referring to dates, with the terms CE and BCE (Common Era and Before Common Era) because it is necessary to avoid offending non-Christians.
You may also be aware that following a complaint by a customer at a Blackpool cafe, police threatened to arrest the Christian owner for displaying the words of the Bible, projected on a nice pictorial background, on a DVD screen on the inside wall of his cafe. It is suspected that the person who complained is a homosexual.
The majority of people in the UK are at least nominally Christian. When is someone going to be threatened with arrest for offending one of them?
Could someone please provide a sensible answer to the above question?
Since the Tony Bland case in 1993, UK courts have granted permission for food and water to be withdrawn from more than 40 patients in so-called persistent vegetative state, thus causing their deaths.
This year came an application for permission to withdraw food and water from a patient not in persistent vegetative state, but said to be "minimally conscious." The 52-year-old woman, referred to in court as "M" - it is not possible to identify her for legal reasons - was brain damaged by a viral disease in 2003. She is unable to breathe unaided or feed herself.
The application came from her family. Her sister told the Court of Protection "She can't move, she can't speak, she's fed through a tube, she can't even enjoy a cup of tea. She's got no pleasure in life. It's not a life, it's an existence, and I know she wouldn't want it."
Care home staff said M sometimes spoke, smiled and cried tears of emotion.
After a 10-day hearing, Mr Justice Baker this week refused the application. He said the preservation of life remained a fundamental principle of the law.
M did experience pain and discomfort, and her disability severely restricted what she could do, but she did have some positive experiences and there was a reasonable prospect those experiences could be extended. He urged the family to work together with doctors and carers on a revised care plan.
The judge's decision is the right one. Apart from the ethical problems involved in taking a human life, allowing the application would have been another step - and a big step - down the slippery slope towards random euthanasia.
There is a little book in the Old Testament called The Song of Solomon. 1 Ki 4:32 says Solomon spoke 3,000 proverbs and his songs were 1,005. Of all the songs that Solomon wrote, this is apparently the song.
In the whole book the name of God is nowhere mentioned, and some people wonder what it's doing in the Bible at all. Examine it, and it's one of the most spiritual books in the Bible.
It appears to be a love story between the king and a Shulamite maiden. Consider it an allegory of the spiritual relationship between the Christian believer and her Lord. As you read it, imagine, if you will, that the Shulamite maiden is the believer, the king is the Lord Jesus Christ, and the daughters of Jerusalem are other believers.
In the first chapter, the believer is newly come to faith, aware of her love for the Lord but not even aware of where to go for fellowship with Him ("Tell me, O you whom I love, Where you feed your flock, Where you make it rest at noon").
By the second chapter, she is aware of her risen Lord, wonderfully victorious out there in the world ("Behold, he comes Leaping upon the mountains, Skipping upon the hills") but content to wait in her own home until He comes to her.
She has some difficult experiences, sometimes at the hands of those she would least expect ("The watchmen who went about the city found me. They struck me, they wounded me; The keepers of the walls Took my veil away from me").
Through the book, you can see how her faith grows. In the second chapter, it's "My beloved is mine, and I am his." In the sixth chapter, it's "I am my beloved's, And my beloved is mine" - more concerned now that He should have all of her than that she should have all of Him. And in the seventh chapter, it becomes just "I am my beloved's, And his desire is towards me."
He invites her "Come with me from Lebanon, my spouse, With me from Lebanon. Look from the top of Amana, From the top of Senir and Hermon, From the lions' dens, From the mountains of the leopards" - to the spiritual heights, where together they can look out at all the Promised Land below.
Until eventually she can say "Come, my beloved, Let us go forth to the field; Let us lodge in the villages. Let us get up early to the vineyards; Let us see if the vine has budded, Whether the grape blossoms are open, And the pomegranates are in bloom."
God wants us to come to the place where we are concerned not just with ourselves, our own family, our own church, our own town (though certainly that), but where He is able to share His heart with us regarding all He is doing, everywhere.
Well, it happened. For a day or two it didn't seem certain what he would do. Then yesterday Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas made an official application to the United Nations for a place for an independent Palestinian state as a full member of the UN.The UN General Council - with one or two exceptions - gave him standing ovations as he made his case.The trouble is that the Palestinians have refused to recognise Israel, whose territory they want to acquire, and have refused to negotiate with Israel. Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the General Council that the Palestinians wanted a state without peace. They should first make peace with Israel and then get their state.The General Council ignored him and voted for the Palestinians. The decision will need to be ratified by the Security Council. I understand they will discuss it on Monday. Full ratification is unlikely to be forthcoming. Either way, Abbas is now a hero among his supporters.The decision is both a victory and a disaster. It achieves nothing on the ground and will surely lead to further violence. An appeal for peaceful demonstrations in Israel yesterday led to stone-throwing at Israeli soldiers. More violence is said to be planned.Rockets from Palestinians in Gaza are continuing to fall on civilian populations in southern Israel. Esti Lehman, of Moshav Shuva, a mother of three children from five months to four years old, wrote in the Israeli media of having only seconds to find shelter after the alarm sounds and having to make, with three small children and only two hands, the terrible decision of who to grab first."They're shooting at me, at my children," she wrote. "This is war."Will there be peace between the Israeli Jews and their Arab neighbours? I think not.The Bible speaks of a time to come of terrible suffering for the Jews, but a time when many will come to faith.It also speaks of a day when the curse will be taken from the earth, the lion will lie down (literally) with the lamb, and there will be no wars. But alas, not yet.
Next week the United Nations will be asked to make a decision which is likely to have momentous consequences. The Palestinians will apply for recognition as a United Nations member state.Israel has said it is willing to negotiate with the Palestinians, with no preconditions. The Palestinians are refusing to negotiate with Israel, or recognise Israel's right to exist. Instead, they will go direct to the United Nations.Next Wednesday, September 21, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will deliver a major address to the UN General Assembly, putting Israel's case (and challenging the nations to deal with Iran in Iran's bid for nuclear weapons).
Next Friday, September 23, the Palestinian Authority will formally apply for full membership of the United Nations. To succeed, it will need two-thirds of the votes of the General Assembly's 193 nations, which it is expected to get. For full membership, it needs the votes of five members of the UN Security Council. Of the five, Russia has agreed to support the Palestinians' bid. If France, China and the UK vote in favour, the United States will - reluctantly - veto the decision. This would leave the PA not a full member of the UN, but recognised as a nonmember state.
A decision at the UN would effectively tear up agreements previously made between Israel and the Palestinians, and could lead to violent conflict in Israel, even war.
Israel is a legally constituted nation, with its own sovereign territory. The Palestinians have been offered a state on more than one occasion, but have hitherto refused the offer. Unfortunately for the Palestinians, they do not want a state as much as they want to see Israel wiped off the map.
Most people either laugh at or choose to ignore biblical prophecy, which is perhaps strange in view of the fact that all biblical prophecy of events to date (including those which took place in Jerusalem 2,000 years ago) has been exactly fulfilled.
The Bible says that God gave the land of Israel, which He calls His land, to Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their descendants for an everlasting possession. It says that eventually all nations will be gathered against Israel to battle. It says, what's more, that God Himself will bring all nations against Israel to battle, so that He can deal with them.
He will judge the nations, He says,
"On account of my people, my heritage Israel,
Whom they have scattered among the nations;
They have also divided up my land" (Joel 3:3).
If you would like to read of those days, start with Joel 3 and Zechariah 14. "The day of the Lord's vengeance" will not be a pretty sight.
No wonder the Bible instructs us to pray for the peace of Jerusalem.
Basildon Academy in Essex, opened last year with almost 1,600 pupils at a cost of £45 million, was not doing well, according to this morning's newspaper.
Parents said graffiti covered the walls, there was little homework set, none of it was marked, and pupils would get up in the middle of class to go for a cigarette. Truancy, fighting, bullying and teachers unable to cope were commonplace.
Then a new headteacher took over.
On his first day he sent 109 pupils home for wearing wrong items of uniform. In three days he sent home 151 pupils. Scores were given detention and dozens put in an isolation centre.
Within 48 hours teachers reported they no longer had to practise "crowd control" and they had twice the amount of time for teaching.
Said the headteacher: "The change is just remarkable. The morale of the teachers is high, there is no bullying and the pupils are happy. And we are instilling good habits that will make them good citizens and employees."
Is it permissible to ask why someone didn't do this before?
Antisemitism is on the increase in the UK. To the extent, writes Melanie Phillips in the Jewish Chronicle, that an increasing number of Jewish people are saying there is no future for Jews in Britain."Week in and week out, Israelis are blamed for defending themselves against mass murder. . . While atrocities by tyrannies and rogue states provoke almost total indifference, Israel is treated as a class apart: apparently the very worst country in the entire world, a kind of global blight which has to be expunged altogether from civilised society if not from the face of the earth. . .
"Few government ministers grasp the nature and scale of what is happening. Most don't think there is a problem, and many of those who do think it is Israel's own fault. . . While many Tory backbenchers support Israel, the government, with some very honourable exceptions, is hostile. . .
"The callow and opportunistic Cameroons are blank slates upon which can be written the fashionable bigotry and historical illiteracy of our times.
"The Cameron government did not create the madness now raging against Israel. It could, however, control it by standing up for truth and justice against lies and prejudice. Typically, it is choosing to fan the flames of ignorance and hatred instead."
One story that was not overburdened by media coverage in the UK: Thousands of demonstrators armed with sledgehammers broke into the Israeli embassy in Cairo last week and sacked and set fire to the building, dumping the Israeli flag and hundreds of documents - some of them classified - through the windows as police looked on.
Israeli officials were unable to contact Field Marshal Mohammed Tantawi, head of the Supreme Military Council, currently the ruling power in Egypt, because no one knew where he was. Or so they said. It was only hours later, after the US intervened, that Egyptian security forces rescued a few Israelis who had locked themselves in a secure part of the building, evidently fearing for their lives.
It is suggested the field marshal delayed in order to demonstrate that a future administration would need the military to keep order. Instead, he appears to have demonstrated that it will be Islamic militants, not the military, who will control Egypt.
The Israeli ambassador and 80 staff and families were taken from their homes and lifted out of Egypt on two Israeli military planes. The Israeli Prime Minister said despite the attack, Israel would keep its peace treaty with Cairo.
Meanwhile, Israel has not forgotten how to defend herself. You will find an interesting insight into the work of some of the most important people in Israel's Defence Forces by clicking here.
Increasingly in recent years universities have become hotbeds of antisemitism.After Edinburgh University Student Association voted to boycott Israel because they decided it was an apartheid state, I was pleased to note that novelist and erstwhile academic Denis MacEoin wrote an open letter to the Association.The letter is copied below, in full:
The Committee
Edinburgh University Student Association
May I be permitted to say a few words to members of the EUSA? I am an Edinburgh graduate (MA 1975) who studied Persian, Arabic and Islamic History in Buccleuch Place under William Montgomery Watt and Laurence Elwell Sutton, two of Britain's great Middle East experts in their day. I later went on to do a PhD at Cambridge and to teach Arabic and Islamic Studies at Newcastle University. Naturally, I am the author of several books and hundreds of articles in this field.
I say all that to show that I am well informed in Middle Eastern affairs and that, for that reason, I am shocked and disheartened by the EUSA motion and vote. I am shocked for a simple reason: there is not and has never been a system of apartheid in Israel. That is not my opinion, that is fact that can be tested against reality by any Edinburgh student, should he or she choose to visit Israel to see for themselves.
Let me spell this out, since I have the impression that those members of EUSA who voted for this motion are absolutely clueless in matters concerning Israel, and that they are, in all likelihood, the victims of extremely biased propaganda coming from the anti-Israel lobby. Being anti-Israel is not in itself objectionable. But I'm not talking about ordinary criticism of Israel. I'm speaking of a hatred that permits itself no boundaries in the lies and myths it pours out. Thus, Israel is repeatedly referred to as a 'Nazi' state. In what sense is this true, even as a metaphor? Where are the Israeli concentration camps? The einzatsgruppen? The SS? The Nuremberg Laws? The Final Solution? None of these things nor anything remotely resembling them exists in Israel, precisely because the Jews, more than anyone on earth, understand what Nazism stood for. It is claimed that there has been an Israeli Holocaust in Gaza (or elsewhere). Where? When? No honest historian would treat that claim with anything but the contempt it deserves. But calling Jews Nazis and saying they have committed a Holocaust is as basic a way to subvert historical fact as anything I can think of.
Likewise apartheid. For apartheid to exist, there would have to be a situation that closely resembled things in South Africa under the apartheid regime. Unfortunately for those who believe this, a weekend in any part of Israel would be enough to show how ridiculous the claim is. That a body of university students actually fell for this and voted on it is a sad comment on the state of modern education. The most obvious focus for apartheid would be the country's 20% Arab population. Under Israeli law, Arab Israelis have exactly the same rights as Jews or anyone else; Muslims have the same rights as Jews or Christians; Baha'is, severely persecuted in Iran, flourish in Israel, where they have their world centre; Ahmadi Muslims, severely persecuted in Pakistan and elsewhere, are kept safe by Israel; the holy places of all religions are protected under a specific Israeli law. Arabs form 20% of the university population (an exact echo of their percentage in the general population). In Iran, the Baha'is (the largest religious minority) are forbidden to study in any university or to run their own universities: why aren't your members boycotting Iran?
Arabs in Israel can go anywhere they want, unlike blacks in apartheid South Africa. They use public transport, they eat in restaurants, they go to swimming pools, they use libraries, they go to cinemas alongside Jews - something no blacks could do in South Africa. Israeli hospitals not only treat Jews and Arabs, they also treat Palestinians from Gaza or the West Bank. In the same wards, in the same operating theatres.
In Israel, women have the same rights as men: there is no gender apartheid. Gay men and women face no restrictions, and Palestinian gays often escape into Israel, knowing they may be killed at home. It seems bizarre to me that LGBT groups call for a boycott of Israel and say nothing about countries like Iran, where gay men are hanged or stoned to death. That illustrates a mindset that beggars belief. Intelligent students thinking it's better to be silent about regimes that kill gay people, but good to condemn the only country in the Middle East that rescues and protects gay people. Is that supposed to be a sick joke?
University is supposed to be about learning to use your brain, to think rationally, to examine evidence, to reach conclusions based on solid evidence, to compare sources, to weigh up one view against one or more others. If the best Edinburgh can now produce are students who have no idea how to do any of these things, then the future is bleak. I do not object to well documented criticism of Israel. I do object when supposedly intelligent people single the Jewish state out above states that are horrific in their treatment of their populations. We are going through the biggest upheaval in the Middle East since the 7th and 8th centuries, and it's clear that Arabs and Iranians are rebelling against terrifying regimes that fight back by killing their own citizens. Israeli citizens, Jews and Arabs alike, do not rebel (although they are free to protest). Yet Edinburgh students mount no demonstrations and call for no boycotts against Libya, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Iran. They prefer to make false accusations against one of the world's freest countries, the only country in the Middle East that has taken in Darfur refugees, the only country in the Middle East that gives refuge to gay men and women, the only country in the Middle East that protects the Baha'is. . . Need I go on? The imbalance is perceptible, and it sheds no credit on anyone who voted for this boycott.
I ask you to show some common sense. Get information from the Israeli embassy. Ask for some speakers. Listen to more than one side. Do not make your minds up until you have given a fair hearing to both parties. You have a duty to your students, and that is to protect them from one-sided argument. They are not at university to be propagandized. And they are certainly not there to be tricked into anti-Semitism by punishing one country among all the countries of the world, which happens to be the only Jewish state. If there had been a single Jewish state in the 1930s (which, sadly, there was not), don't you think Adolf Hitler would have decided to boycott it? Of course he would, and he would not have stopped there. Your generation has a duty to ensure that the perennial racism of anti-Semitism never sets down roots among you. Today, however, there are clear signs that it has done so and is putting down more. You have a chance to avert a very great evil, simply by using reason and a sense of fair play. Please tell me that this makes sense to you. I have given you some of the evidence. It's up to you to find out more.
Yours sincerely,
Dr. Denis MacEoin
When Jesus was down here, it was evident that He wasn't here for ever. But while He was here, there was one thing He made abundantly clear. He will return.He spoke about it often. He told parables about it. Many books of the Bible talk about it. Some devote whole chapters to it.
The book of Revelation, speaking in prophecy about that time, says "Let us be glad and rejoice and give him glory, for the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his wife has made herself ready" (Rev 19:7). Jesus is the Heavenly Bridegroom; those who know Him are His bride. One day He will come to take them home.
Notice it doesn't say "will hope to be ready" or "will make herself ready," but "has made herself ready." For most brides, their wedding day will be the most important day of their lives. You can't just walk into a church and get married in your lunch hour. There are preparations to be made: the church to book, bridesmaids to be chosen, bridal wear to be selected and the reception to arrange.
So how do you make yourself ready for His coming?
You must make sure that Jesus has first place in your affections. Not your husband. Not your wife. Not your children. Not anything else. But Jesus. If you want to have a successful marriage, don't put your spouse first. Put Jesus first, and everything else will fall into place.
You need to have a longing for that day. Before you were married, do you remember how you counted the days to your wedding? Hebrews says He will appear a second time "to those who eagerly wait for Him." Those who love Him are strangers and pilgrims in this world. They have another home being prepared specially for them. And it's much better than the one they have now. Each day they spend here is one day less and one day nearer.
And then we need to be busy doing what we're expected to be doing. The Scripture in Revelation that says "the marriage of the Lamb has come, and his wife has made herself ready" goes on: "And to her it was granted to be arrayed in fine linen, clean and bright, for the fine linen represents the righteous acts of the saints."
Live today as though today is all you have. After all, we have no guarantee that we'll still be here tomorrow.
"Behold, I come quickly!" (Rev 3:11).
There are an estimated 85 Islamic sharia courts in Britain. There is no objection to their providing mediation in religious matters, but there have been concerns that they should not deal with matters of family and criminal law, thus providing an alternative to the British legal system.
A UK Ministry of Justice inquiry into the operation of sharia courts in Britain was scrapped - because the Muslim courts refused to co-operate.
Jihad Watch says: "As has been the case in Britain, Sharia's proponents [in Germany] got their foot in the door with pleas for just a little Sharia, just for a few community matters. Then, the reality hits that Sharia is a package deal; as even Imam Rauf has noted, 'it is not possible in principle to limit the Shari'ah to some aspects of human life and leave out others.'
"And so commences a process of 'jurisdiction creeping.' There is no such thing as 'just a little' Sharia."
With regard to the situation in Germany, Jihad Watch quotes from an article in Der Spiegel:
In mosques or tearooms, Muslim elders dispense verdicts that keep their communities in line. They mediate between aggrieved immigrants, sometimes at the expense of German justice. Some say the arbitrations ease caseloads in court, but others see the creeping advance of Sharia law.
The men ambushed Fuat S. on the street, then locked him in a basement and tortured him. Fuat was later admitted to the hospital in Berlin's Neukolln district with gaping wounds, contusions and broken bones.
Police took his statement concerning the attack the same night. Fuat S., a gambler and a recipient of "Hartz IV" - Germany's social welfare benefits for the long-term unemployed - gave a detailed statement. He'd conned an acquaintance, Mustafa O., out of €150,000 ($217,000) and the man was taking his revenge, Fuat said, along with his three brothers. They hit his hands, arms and knees with a hammer and threatened to shoot him.
The public prosecutor's office in Berlin initiated proceedings against Mustafa O., a Palestinian man who had come to their attention repeatedly for violent acts. Police had investigated him in a number of cases, and now prosecutors saw an opportunity to convict a dangerous repeat offender. But when the case began, Fuat S., the principle [sic] witness, unexpectedly withdrew his testimony. It was not Mustafa who had tortured him, he said, but an Albanian man he didn't know. Mustafa, he said, wasn't even in the basement at the time. This was clearly a lie, as police analysis of telephone data showed, but the judge was forced to acquit the defendant due to lack of evidence.
The decision, in fact, was reached by a different judge. According to police, the victim's and the perpetrator's families had met at a restaurant in the presence of an Islamic "justice of the peace," an arbitrator who mediates conflicts between Muslims. The two families had reached a compromise: Fuat would drop the charges, and in exchange be relieved of part of his debt.
According to Bernhard Mix, the public prosecutor in charge of the case, Fuat's false testimony was part of a deal between the families. "It's difficult to establish the truth using legal means, when the perpetrator and the victim reach an agreement," he says.
Politicians and social workers tend to focus on forced marriages and honor killings, but the baleful influence of these Islamic arbitrators has gone largely unnoticed by the public. Joachim Wagner, an author and television journalist of many years, has taken a closer look at the phenomenon in his book "Richter ohne Gesetz" ("Judges without Laws"). Reconstructing Mustafa O.'s case, he reaches the conclusion that "the Islamic parallel justice system is becoming a threat to the constitutional legal system."
These justices of the peace don't wear robes. Their courtrooms are mosques or teahouses. They draw their authority not from the law, but from their standing within the community. Most of them are senior members of their families, or imams, and some even fly in from Turkey or Lebanon to resolve disputes. Muslims seek them out when families argue, when daughters take up with unbelievers or when clans clash. They often trust these arbitrators more than they trust the state.
The late juvenile court judge Kirsten Heisig drew attention the the problem a year ago: "The law is slipping out of our hands. It's moving to the streets, or into a parallel system where an imam or another representative of the Koran determines what must be done."
The question is: are similar things happening in Britain? It's a question that deserves serious investigation.
Wilf Cooper, of Lockleaze, Bristol, gave his wife to understand that he was going to six half-marathon races to put up barriers and help with the race.In fact, he was one of the runners. His wife found out when a neighbour spotted him on television. "He was in the doghouse that day, I can tell you," she says.
The reason for his subterfuge: Mr Cooper is 90 years old, and his wife worries about him. (They have been married for 67 years.) Despite having been found out, he wants to race one more time while he's able.
A marathon runner at 90, you say? What next! But wait.
The Daily Mail reports that the first person to sign up for the 2012 Edinburgh marathon is 100 years old.
Fauja Singh, who used to live in the Punjab but now lives in the UK, was born on April 1, 1911. He has run five marathons in London, one in Toronto and one in New York.
He is pictured with a long white beard, an orange turban - Mr Singh is a Sikh - sports gear and a massive pair of trainers.
The secret of a long and happy life, he says, is to be stress-free. ("Stay away from people who are negative, stay smiling and keep running.") And the diet he chooses to keep him running is plenty of ginger curry and copious amounts of tea.
Plenty of ginger curry and copious amounts of tea would probably spur me on, too. But not, I think, to running marathons.
What a commotion.
MP Nadine Dorries has proposed an amendment to the Health and Social Care Bill to the effect that women considering abortion should be offered NHS-funded counselling by an independent organisation that does not itself provide abortions and does not have a financial interest in the women's decision.
Opponents of the amendment say the intention is to take counselling out of the hand of organisations like Maries Stopes and BPAS, who also do abortions (and profit handsomely from them).
Mrs Dorries, who says the abortion lobby has reacted with almost hysterical outrage, claims to have been subjected to constant vilification and near-daily death threats.
Pro-abortion campaigners accuse Mrs Dorries of "pushing things down women's throats." She says independent counselling would only be for women who wanted it. The independent organisation suggested to offer counselling would not be a religious-affiliated group, but the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy.
(Some pro-lifers have suggested such a move could save 60,000 babies' lives each year).
"All I want is for women to have more choice, more guidance, so they can make a well-informed decision. Why should all these campaigners be anxious about women being offered independent advice?" she says. "If they are really pro-choice as they pretend, they would support my proposal."
Prime Minister David Cameron is said to be sympathetic to pregnant women being able to have independent advice and counselling and he will grant Conservative MPs a free vote on the issue, but he will not vote for the Dorries proposal because he is concerned that it would prevent abortion providers providing counselling as well.
The BBC says the Government has written to all MPs to tell them that health ministers will vote against the Dorries amendment, but Downing Street said no pressure was being applied to Conservative MPs to vote in a particular way.
Archbishop Cranmer says that before the General Election Mr Cameron promised a free vote on the upper time limit for abortion, but said it must remain a conscience issue and a free vote. And when women are offered a free choice in counselling, says Cranmer, what does he do?
"He writes to every Conservative MP, putting pressure on them to vote against the amendment. . . He knows full well that a letter from Government to all his MPs functions effectively as a three-line whip. Those who seek favour and enhancement will cave in, despite 92% of them supporting the amendment in their consciences."
The 92 per cent he mentions refers to a ComRes poll sponsored by the Right to Know Campaign which said that 92 per cent of MPs supported the principle that women considering abortion should have access to advice from someone who had no financial interest in the outcome of their decision.
What a commotion, indeed.
The matter will be debated in the House of Commons tomorrow.
May common sense and righteousness prevail.
Twelve days ago 12 Arab terrorists - Palestinians and some Egyptians - crossed the Egyptian border into southern Israel.
They raked an Israeli bus with fire, wounding about a dozen passengers, including children. Miraculously, no one was killed. One terrorist rushed up to a second bus and detonated explosives, killing himself and the driver. Fortunately, the bus had no passengers. They opened fire on a car, killing its female driver. They fired at a second car, killing its four passengers - two married couples on their way to a holiday in Eilat.
Two members of the Israeli security forces were killed in a firefight with the terrorists. Five Egyptians, including members of Egyptian border patrols, were shot dead after they opened fire on the Israelis, resulting in large anti-Israel demonstrations in Egypt.
The Israeli air force responded to the terrorist attack with attacks on the terrorist organisation responsible in Gaza. The terrorist organisation Hamas, which controls Gaza, arranged a ceasefire with Israel, but rockets from Gaza continued to fall on southern Israel. (As the Israelis say, "We cease, and they fire.")
As a result of rockets fired from Gaza since the terrorist incursion, 10 were injured, two seriously, when a rocket hit a synagogue in Ashdod. A civilian was killed and nine were injured, some seriously, in Beersheva. A baby was among the injured in Ofakim. Families in southern Israel were warned not to go more than 15 seconds from a bomb shelter.
Some people suspect the rocket barrage was ordered by Iran (which is continuing its nuclear development programme), possibly as a trial run for a massive rocket attack on the whole of Israel by Hezbollah in Lebanon.
Yesterday a young Palestinian terrorist allegedly planning to kill teenagers at a nightclub stabbed a taxi driver, drove the taxi at a policeman and stabbed five policemen and a security guard in Tel Aviv, leaving several seriously wounded.
Palestinians, who refuse to recognise Israel's right to exist or to negotiate with Israel, are to go ahead in the next couple of weeks with an appeal for the UN to recognise a unilaterally-declared Palestinian state.
The media spotlight at the moment is on Libya. News reports in the last two days say Libyan rebels have freed 11,000 prisoners, but 50,000 locked up since the insurgency began are still missing. Mass graves have begun to be discovered around former detention centres. Rebels are currently united in the search for Gaddafi; how united they will remain after he is captured or killed no one knows.
Whatever happens in Libya, people should be aware that another serious Middle East conflict may be in the offing.
General Richard Dannatt, until his retirement Britain's Chief of the General Staff, is a committed Christian.
