Take care, Christian chief warns PM

David Cameron wanted Christian churches to do their bit as part of his Big Society, but when it comes to issues that Christians stand for and petition for, Christians are seemingly ignored.

Peter Kerridge, chief executive of Premier Christian Radio, has written to the Prime Minister pointing out that politicians would do well to heed the views of Christians, "who are, quite clearly, more faithful to their beliefs than the dwindling numbers of party members."

Attendance at the three main party conferences had been "embarrassingly low" this year, a reflection of the declining membership of the three main parties from a total of around 1.4 million in 1991 to less than half a million in 2012.

"Perhaps politicians of all parties should reflect on these depressing figures when they consider their positions on the rights of Christians in the UK.

"Some 3.8 million Christians attend church on a regular basis - that's nearly ten times the number of card carrying party members."

Mr Kerridge said the Christian vote could become a deciding factor in the next election. "Christians will not leave their faith at home when they cast their votes at the ballot box," he said.

Very much to the point, would you think?

Remembering the suffering

Some 200 million Christians worldwide are suffering persecution and discrimination.

* In Pakistan, Christians are threatened with blasphemy laws, with the prospect of life imprisonment. An estimated 700 Pakistani Christian girls are kidnapped each year and forced to marry their Muslim captors.

* Christians in Syria are faced with assault, kidnap and murder. Since the conflict there began, tens of thousands of Christians have lost their homes and been driven out of their towns, leaving them without basic supplies.

* Tens of thousands of Christians suffer unspeakable cruelties in North Korea's notorious prison camps. Many are worked to death. Some are executed. Many believe North Korea is the world's worst persecutor of Christians.

* There are increased fears for the safety of Christians in Egypt as President Mohammed Morsi, of the Muslim Brotherhood, tightens his grip on power. Many Christians live in poverty and face attack from militant Muslims.

* The church in Nigeria faces intense persecution by militant Islamists. A hundred bombs are said to have exploded in one town. In one area, 25 churches have been destroyed. Two congregations in one state have been completely wiped out.

* Iranian pastor Behnam Irani, aged 41, is in prison because of his faith and ministry. His life is in grave danger because of the beatings he receives. He has severe injuries, is losing his eyesight, and has been denied medical treatment.

* Ethnic Christian groups in Burma regularly suffer intimidation, rape, forced labour and the closure of churches.

* Holy Trinity Pentecostal Church's building in Moscow was demolished by the authorities in the middle of the night. The pastor may face prosecution for holding a service in the ruins.

Next Thursday, November 1, is a Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church. You can attend prayer events across the UK, or you can pray at home. You can find details or download a free prayer guide at www.barnabasfund.org/UK.

The BBC and the Middle East

During Tuesday night more than 70 rockets were fired into southern Israel from Gaza. (They have continued to be fired since.)

On Wednesday The Commentator published the following:

Over sixty rockets were fired into Israel overnight last night. And how exactly did the BBC choose to report it?

That's right. "Lead with the Israeli response, and wait until halfway through to bury the fact that dozens of rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel." Or at least that's what I imagine the editor would have said. It certainly looks that way if you read their article.

Also, calling terrorists  firing rockets into civilian areas 'militants'? Were the 7/7 bombers 'militants'? Were the 9/11 perpetrators 'militants'? No - they're terrorists.

But when it comes down to the Israel-Palestine conflict, equivocation and moral relativism seems to be in the BBC's guidelines. . . 

You can read the BBC story here.

You  may feel that "wait until halfway through to bury the fact that dozens of rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel" is unfair. But the BBC did lead with the Israeli strikes on Gaza, not the terrorist attacks on Israel. And remarks about calling terrorists "militants" are fair comment.

I have no intention of commenting at this time on the Jimmy Savile scandal currently engulfing the BBC. (Plenty of others will be doing that.) But can it be hoped that while the BBC is seeking for the truth in that crisis, it might review its awful liberal mindset and its appalling anti-Israel bias?

Massacre of the innocents

There are deeply entrenched arguments for and against legalised abortion. (They can't all be true.)

Two things are clear. First, someone looking at a 20-week ultrasound image of an unborn baby or seeing Professor Stuart Campbell's amazing 3D images of babies walking in the womb would be hard pressed to deny the personhood of the baby. Second, abortion ends a baby's life.

Last year, according to Government figures, 208,553 babies were killed by abortion in England, Wales and Scotland - 4,000 a week.

Many Christians think that abortion is just another social issue, and that they are free to do as much or as little about it as they feel inclined. That's not really true.

The Bible says

Rescue those who are unjustly sentenced to death; don't stand back and let them die. Don't try to disclaim responsibility by saying you didn't know about it.  For God, who knows all hearts, knows yours, and he knows you knew! And he will reward everyone according to his deeds (Pro 24:11, 12 Living Bible).

Or as Dietrich Bonhoeffer put it

Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.

This Saturday, October 27 - the anniversary of the passing of the Abortion Act - is the National Day of Prayer about abortion. Will you pray on the day? You can find details of the day and download a prayer guide or a PowerPoint presentation here.

Concerning the Jews

How many Christians are unaware that God made a covenant with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their descendants - the Jews  - that has never been rescinded?

You can read in Genesis chapters 12 to 17 about God's covenant with Abraham, you can read later in Genesis about how the covenant was confirmed exclusively to Isaac and Jacob and Jacob's descendants, and you can read in Genesis chapter 17 how the covenant was an everlasting covenant. In other words, the promises God made via Abraham to the Jews still stand.

Back in Genesis 3, after Adam and Eve sinned, God made a promise. He told the serpent:

I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise his heel.

That's a promise of a Saviour. 

From the time God made that promise, Satan did everything he knew to prevent that promise being fulfilled. He persuaded Cain to kill Abel in Genesis 4; he attempted to pollute man's seed in Genesis 6; he sought to prevent Abraham having a legitimate heir in Genesis 12 and Genesis 20; he had Pharaoh order the death of all male Hebrew children in Exodus 1; he sought to have all the children of Jehoram killed in 2 Chronicles 21; he sought to have all the children of Ahaziah killed in 2 Chronicles 22; he tried to have Haman kill all the Jews in the captivity in Esther 3; he had Herod kill all the young children in Bethlehem in Matthew 2; and he made serious attempts on Jesus' life in Luke 4, Mark 4 and Luke 8, not to mention trying to destroy Him at His passion.

There's more. But what I have said already will for some be a shock to the system. So enough for one blog post.

Except to say two things.

First, what I have said above has tremendous import for every Christian. Second, please don't take my word for it. Do look up the Scriptures for yourself.

'Death' pathway: Action at last?

After more complaints that hospital patients have been placed on the Liverpool Care Pathway without relatives being consulted, and allowed to die, Labour health spokesman Andy Burnham MP is said to have called for an urgent review.

Is this just a political stance? Or is there some hope that something will follow?

The Liverpool Care Pathway is intended to help patients whose death is imminent, allowing sedation and the withdrawal of intrusive treatment. I wrote about deaths on the LCP here, here and here.

Mrs Marion Hebbourne's aunt, 85-year-old Olive Goom, was admitted to Chelsea and Westminster Hospital with a broken bone, according to the Daily Mail. Mrs Hebbourne was preparing for her aunt to be released.

On the Saturday she telephoned and asked if she should visit, but was told there were no worries. On the Sunday she visited and found her aunt being prepared for the mortuary. She had been placed on the LCP without relatives' knowledge and had died alone.

The same paper reports that 83-year-old Phyllis Nicholls was admitted to Epsom Hospital with a urinary infection. Her drip was removed and morphine administered. Her daughter found by accident that she had been placed on the end-of-life pathway, but too late to save her.

The question is - how does it come about that something like the LCP, with its life and death issues, can be administered so carelessly?

Melanie Phillips, writing in the Mail, says the Liverpool Care Pathway has become a backdoor form of euthanasia, used as "an obscene abuse of people who expect the NHS to care for them, not kill them."

She writes:

How can hospitals governed by the ethical imperative to 'first do no harm' be killing patients in their care? How can the NHS have been turned in these circumstances into a National Death Service?. . . 

It has arisen from a profound confusion in society caused by a collapse of moral absolutes and a resulting inability to make the key distinction between dying and killing. . .

First, the word 'dying' has been applied to people suffering from terminal illness or who are considered by doctors or other experts to have lives that are not worth living, even when they are not dying at all.

The second stage in this abuse of language has been to re-label actions designed to end the life of someone who is not dying by calling this 'helping them to die.'

Such actions include the withdrawal of food or water. But that is starving or dehydrating someone to death. And that is not helping them to die, but killing them.

Yet that is precisely what has been happening, ever since the courts ruled in 1993 that the feeding tubes could be removed from the Hillsborough stadium disaster victim Tony Bland, who was in a persistent vegetative state, because such artificial nutrition and hydration were deemed to be 'treatment.'

The judges disingenuously claimed then that this was not killing, but allowing Tony Bland to die. But he was not dying.

With this case a fateful legal line was crossed. And so 'dying' has become a euphemism for killing.

The fundamental driver of all this is the belief that certain people are better off dead because their lives are deemed worthless, a drain on the public purse, or both.

The Liverpool Killing Pathway is driven not just by crude economic calculation, but by a wider brutalisation of our culture, at the heart of which lies the erosion of respect for the innate value of human life.

Homosexual marriage 'sacrilegious and sociopathic'

The party conference season may be about over, but the argument for and against same-sex marriage has lost none of its heat.

Norman Lund, writing on Anglican Mainstream's website, says homosexual marriage is "sacrilegious, sociopathic and heretical."

Sacrilegious because marriage was instituted by God Himself and is beyond the right or authority of earthly governments to change or redefine. Sociopathic because it denies a child's need for a mother and a father. Heretical because it violates God's revealed will concerning homosexual behaviour, violates the commandment to honour one's father and mother by denying that marriage requires a father and a mother, and violates, he says, the commandment against adultery by denying that marriage requires a husband and a wife.

The Government's most senior lawyer, Attorney General Dominic Grieve, warned that homosexual marriage would raise "profound philosophical difficulties" for some workers in the public sector.

There would be "individual conscience" issues for workers who would have to obey the rule of law by carrying out their public duties. A serious debate was now needed about the extent to which individual conscience should be accommodated.

Opponents of homosexual marriage warn that what is now happening in the United States could happen here.

* Dr Angela McCaskill is the first deaf black woman to be granted a PhD by Gallaudet University, a national US university for deaf people. She has worked at the university for more than 20 years as its chief diversity officer, teacher, administrator and leader. She has been suspended from her job at the university because she signed a petition for the people of Maryland to be allowed to vote on same-sex marriage.

* Crystal Dixon, an administrator at the University of Toledo, was fired after writing a letter - as a private citizen - to the editor of a Toledo newspaper respectfully opposing the notion of homosexual rights and explaining God's plan for human beings. Activists later tried to keep a city from hiring her.

* Viki Knox, a special education teacher in New Jersey, wrote a message on her personal Facebook page criticising the school's promotion of a "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender History Month." People demanded she should be fired and planned protests. The lawyer who began the attack on her said "Hateful public comments from a teacher cannot be tolerated. She has a right to say it. But she does not have a right to keep her job after saying it." Under pressure and facing threats not only to her job and her pension, Viki Knox chose to resign.

* Julea Ward, a graduate student at Eastern Michigan University, was dismissed from that school's counselling programme after asking permission to refer a client to another counsellor because she was uncomfortable affirming the client's same-sex relationship.

Life in a country at war

Sometimes it seems like half the world has little idea what the other half is suffering.

The violence in Syria has caused thousands to flee for their lives, Open Doors reports. Many are displaced within Syria; many are refugees outside Syria, living in the most humiliating circumstances, without shelter, clean water, power, food and medical care.

Says a Christian pastor in Syria: "Millions are not sleeping in their own beds, forced out of their homes to find themselves with their children homeless and living in public parks or in the wilderness. Others are not sure if they or their children and loved ones will see the light of a new day. Tens of thousands of families lost loved ones - a child, a father, a mother or a husband.

"Hundreds of the injured died for lack of medical care. Thousands of children go to bed terrified of the sound of shelling. . .

"My people are hurting. I can cry like Nehemiah because the walls of our cities are burnt and the people in great trouble and disgrace. I can weep like Jeremiah because of the intensity and the spread of evil. I can mourn like David because of the indiscriminate brutal killing of innocent people, children, women, elderly, youth subject to shelling or under the rubble of their homes."

Approximately 30,000 are said to have died in the fighting. There are refugees in Jordan, Turkey and Lebanon. There are 1.2 million displaced in Syria; 2.5 million in Syria need aid.

Many Christians have lost their houses or apartments. "Their apartments are easily confiscated by the rebels to be used for snipers," said a spokesman. "The Christian community is the only group that doesn't fight back or doesn't protect property with guns. So when the rebels search a place to stay or to use for their battle, they choose the houses and apartments of the softest target - the Christians."

The Christian pastor says outreach continues despite the terrible conditions. "We are here for a divine reason; we trust and rely on our sovereign loving Lord. We believe that we are in the midst of a spiritual war. In this country there are many who are much more effective than us militarily, politically, economically and socially, but none have the privilege of being effective in the spiritual battle like we are.

"We thank God because the church is united across the country in prayer 24 hours a day, seven days a week, praying for the glory of God to dwell in the church, praying for an end to the bloodshed, for peace in the country, for keeping the church's faithful witness, to reach out to the suffering, to share the divine cure of the gospel, to speak the word of the Lord in all boldness.

"While revenge, power and hatred are the worshipped gods and the highest values in a dirty sectarian political fight, by God's grace we are sowing the seeds of love and forgiveness. The church is active in relief work, trying to reach the suffering with the love of Christ.

"We deeply appreciate the prayers of God's people everywhere; it is a rare time where the church in Syria is feeling the oneness of the body of Christ all over the globe. For this, we thank the Lord, for it is a great encouragement to us."

Find out more here.

Einstein, intellect and little children

I was reading the other day that Einstein's "God letter" is going up for sale.

On January 3, 1954, a year before his death, Einstein wrote a letter to philosopher Erik Gutkind in which he said that "The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this."

The letter, bought by its present owner from Bloomsbury Auctions in London in 2008 for $404,000, is going on eBay with an opening bid of $3 million. A representative of the agency handling the sale said it could fetch double or triple that amount.

Mind you, you don't just get the letter. For that amount of money, they throw in the envelope as well.

Einstein once believed the universe had always existed. The discovery of scientific evidence that the universe had a beginning was, he said, "irritating." In his later years, he evidently had not discovered a personal relationship with the Cause behind the beginning.

Jesus said: "Unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven" (Matt 18:3).

So here we have Einstein, whose intellect was perhaps a barrier to a personal faith; someone who is going to spend a fortune for a letter doubting the existence of a personal God; and some people like little children who can have fellowship with their Heavenly Father at no cost to themselves.

It cost something, of course, to make it possible. It cost the Son of God a life of rejection, the torment He suffered after His arrest, the agony and shame of  crucifixion and the loss of fellowship with His Father for the first time ever as He hung on the cross.

The other day, I was talking to an old lady about Christ's sacrifice. "He didn't have to do all that," she said. Indeed He didn't. What caused Him to do all that was love.

Love is something you can't reduce to a mathematical formula. But it's real, so real, nevertheless.

Caring, or killing? A statement

Following complaints that hospital patients in Britain are dying unnecessarily because of careless use of the Liverpool Care Pathway, top healthcare organisations are calling for better supervision.

The LCP was designed to bring hospice-style care to patients in hospital in the last days or hours of life.

It aimed to allow the patient to have a peaceful death by avoiding unnecessary and burdensome medical intervention. It permits withholding of medication, hydration and nutrition and allows the patient to be sedated until death takes place.

There have been complaints that patients have been put on the pathway unnecessarily, and that by withdrawing hydration and nutrition and sedating the patient, death has become a self-fulfilling prophecy. There have been suggestions of unofficial involuntary euthanasia.

Several months ago, senior consultant Professor Patrick Pullicino said too often elderly patients who could live longer were placed on the LCP, which had become an "assisted death pathway rather than a care pathway."

There was often a lack of clear evidence for putting the patient on the pathway. Pressure on beds and difficulty with handling difficult patients were involved.
 
"If we accept the pathway we accept that euthanasia is part of the standard way of dying, as it [the pathway] is now associated with 29 per cent of deaths. Very likely many elderly patients who could live substantially longer are killed by the LCP."

I wrote about deaths on the LCP here.

Currently a patient can be placed on the LCP on the say-so of one doctor.

More than 20 organisations, including the Royal College of General Practitioners, the Royal College of Physicians, the Royal College of Nursing, the National Council for Palliative Care, Macmillan Cancer Support, Age UK and the Alzheimer's Society, have now issued a joint statement. It points out that the LCP does not preclude the use of clinically-assisted nutrition or hydration, but prompts clinicians to consider whather it is needed and in the patient's best interest.

It says a decision to consider using the pathway should always be made by the most senior doctor available, with help from other staff involved, and should be countersigned as soon as possible by the doctor responsible for the patient's care. Carers and families should always be included in the decision-making process.

"We support the appropriate use of the Liverpool Care Pathway and make clear that it is not about ending life, but rather about supporting the delivery of excellent end of life care."

Are you looking for freedom?

If there is a God, people say, and God wants people to know Him, why doesn't He show Himself? Why doesn't He appear clearly to people, so they would have no doubt about His existence?

I think the answer is that God has given people a free will. There is ample evidence that God exists, in the sun, the moon, the stars and the wonders of nature. And God has promised that those who seek Him will find Him.

But God forces Himself on no one. People have a free will; the power to choose. If they choose to live all their lives without Him, they can. But if they live all their lives without Him, they mustn't expect when their lives end to find God there waiting to welcome them. If they live all their lives without Him, they will live in eternity without Him, by their own choice.

Sometimes people don't want anyone to rule over them. They want to decide for themselves, free to do what they want to do, free from moral restraint. But freedom isn't freedom to do what you want to do. That's not freedom. Freedom is freedom to do the right thing.

I ran my own life for 24 years, until I realised I'd made a mess of it. I realised there was Someone who not only could run it better than I could, but had my own very best interests at heart.

The man who is in Christ is free - free from the things that drag a man down, free to live the life he was made for. The Bible says that he whom Christ sets free is free indeed.

That's freedom.

But what about rape?

When there is an unwanted pregnancy, I believe abortion is never the best option. I believe there is always a better alternative.

But what, you might ask, if the pregnancy is the result of rape?

A woman who has suffered rape has had a terrible experience and needs all the love and all the care she can get. What she does not need is the additional trauma of having the baby torn from her body. Half the baby is the father's. But the other half is the mother's. Given time, she can grow to love that baby, and that child can become a blessing to society.

Besides, that baby is innocent. The baby did not ask to be conceived in that fashion. So why should an innocent baby have to have its life ended because of the sin of its father?

But you are a bloke, you might say. What do you know?

Every pregnancy involves the action of a man somewhere, and every man was once himself a foetus. Abortion is not just a women's issue. But true, I have not been in that terrible position personally. Perhaps we ought to consider the opinions of people better qualified to speak.

A number of women who had been pregnant as a result of physical assault formed a group which they called the Ad Hoc Committee of Women Pregnant by Sexual Assault. Here is what they have to say:

Many people have strong opinions about abortion is cases of pregnancies resulting from rape or incest. However, the real experiences and needs of women who have actually experienced pregnancies from sexual assault are often ignored, even though our experiences are frequently used to promote abortion on demand. . . 

From the perspective of those of us who have actually been through a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest, people on both sides of the abortion debate, and the media fanning the flames of the controversy, are getting it wrong.

On one side are those who argue that pregnancies resulting from rape and incest occur so rarely that we shouldn't let it impact public policy on abortion. This is hurtful to women who do become pregnant from rape or incest and need support. It can also lead to questioning as to whether a woman or girl is telling the truth about being raped.

On the other side are those who perpetuate the myth that women and girls who become pregnant from sexual assault overwhelmingly want, need and benefit from having abortions. This also hurts women and fans the flames of prejudice toward those who do not want to have an abortion, even leading some to question whether a woman or girl who wishes not to abort has "really" been raped. And it can lead to strong pressure to abort by those who think the woman or girl does not know what is really best for her. . .

Women and girls who become pregnant from rape or incest need real support and resources that meet their needs. In many cases, however, these needs are not met because most people assume that abortion will solve the problem. . . 

From personal experience, many of us discovered that abortion only added to our trauma and created additional obstacles to finding healing. . .

From our perspective the issues and emotions involved are not as straightforward as most people presume. That is why those of us who have actually been in this situation need and deserve to be heard. . . 

Most of the debate surrounding this issue has taken place without input from us or other women like us.

We are especially concerned - and offended - when our circumstances are exploited to promote abortion on demand, especially when there is no platform being offered for us to voice our real needs and concerns. 

Peter Saunders, who quotes the women's remarks above on his blog, also has the details of what claims to be the largest survey ever undertaken of women who became pregnant as a result of sexual assault. It surveyed 192 such women.

Some 29 per cent had abortions, 69 per cent continued with their pregnancy and a small percentage miscarried. In many cases, there was strong pressure or demands to abort, and some, especially teenage girls, were forced to have an abortion.

Many women who had abortions said abortion increased the trauma they were experiencing. Nearly 80 per cent of those who had an abortion said abortion had been the wrong solution.

But here's the most telling statistic:

Of those women who decided to continue with the pregnancy, not one regretted doing so.

The story of Miriam Rosenthal

Miriam Schwarcz was born in 1922 in Komarno, Czechoslovakia, the 13th child of a gentleman farmer. She was spoiled.

As she grew up, she was always asking when she would be married. One day she and her mother met with a Jewish matchmaker. In her collection of photographs, Miriam spotted a handsome young man named Bela Rosenthal. They were married in 1944.

They were together only a short time before Bela was sent to a slave labour camp and Miriam to Auschwitz.

One day in Auschwitz an SS officer told the pregnant women to step forward, as their food rations were being doubled. Miriam, who was four months pregnant, didn't move. "Miriam, what are you doing?" her cousin asked. But Miriam stood where she was.

Two hundred women stepped forward, including some who weren't pregnant. All 200 went to the gas chambers.

Miriam was moved to a satellite camp at Dachau, and wound up in a cellar with six other pregnant women. Miriam was the last of the seven to give birth.

Babies were regarded as useless mouths to feed and were normally murdered at birth. Somehow these survived. American soldiers who liberated the camp wept when they saw the babies in a graveyard of bones.

Miriam returned to Komarno - and found Bela. He too had survived.

"I could see him coming, running from afar, and I shouted 'Bela, Bela.' I wasn't sure it was him," says Miriam. "He was running and calling my name. I can't describe that feeling when he saw our baby, when he saw Leslie for the first time. We cried and cried and cried."

In 1947, the three moved to Canada. Bela became a rabbi. He died aged 97.

Miriam still has Leslie, her "miracle baby." He's 67 now. He visits his mother every day. He knows something of what his mother auffered.

Miriam has just celebrated her 90th birthday.

The way to abundant life

The Bible clearly teaches that God is a Trinity. In other words, there is only one God, but that one God is in three persons: God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. One God in three persons; three persons in one God.

Perhaps the most convincing reason for this is that God is love. The Bible doesn't say just that God loves, or that God commends love, but that God is love. Love has to have an object. God could not have existed alone. So before creation began, there were the three persons of the Godhead, loving each other.

As you go through the Bible, it's interesting to notice the ministry, if that's the right word, of each one.

All three were involved in creation. God the Father spoke the word. The second verse in the Bible says the Holy Spirit was there, hovering over the face of the waters. Of the Son of God, the Scripture says that all things in heaven and earth were created by Him; all things were created through Him and for Him (Col 1:16).

All three were involved in the crucifixion, for Heb 9:14 says that Christ through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God.

And all three were involved in the resurrection. In John 2:19 - 21 Jesus said if they destroyed His body, He would raise it up in three days. Gal 1:1 says God the Father raised Jesus from the dead. And in some translations 1 Pet 3:18 gives us the idea that the Holy Spirit had a part too.

Now here's something amazing. If you are a committed Christian, did you know that it took all three persons of the Godhead to bring you to faith? It was the Holy Spirit who convicted you of sin, for John 16:8 says it is His ministry to convict the world of sin, of righteousness and of judgment. It was God the Father who drew you to Christ, for Jesus said no man comes to Him except the Father draws him (John 6:44). And it was the Son of God who took you in and gave you eternal life.

If you're not yet a committed Christian, Jesus said "I am the door" (John 10:9). He's the way to God. Life without Him is empty. Life with him is abundant. Life with Him is what we were created for.  If you want the answer to your problems, come to Christ.

He's waiting.

'Bigots,' 'lunatics' and homosexual marriage

Despite a petition with more than half-a-million signatures protesting at moves to legalise same-sex marriage, Prime Minister David Cameron says he is "absolutely determined" to go ahead with legalising it.

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg reportedly thinks people who do not agree with homosexual marriage are bigots. (The word was included in a draft of a speech Nick Clegg was to give which was issued to the media and later withdrawn.)

Veteran broadcaster Roger Bolton said that in the modern culture of broadcasting, anyone who opposed homosexual marriage was treated as a lunatic if it was because of his or her religious beliefs.

The petition I mentioned in the first paragraph was organised by Coalition for Marriage - who incidentally are organising a sell-out rally with Ann Widdecombe and Lord Carey as speakers at Birmingham City Hall on the day of the Chancellor's speech at the Conservative Party conference. The same Coalition for Marriage commissioned a legal opinion on the implications of homosexual marriage and liberty of conscience from Aidan O'Neill QC, a leading human rights lawyer.

He said that if same-sex marriage were legalised

* A hospital, armed forces or university chaplain who preached that marriage was only for one man and one woman could be disciplined by his employer, even if he were preaching in his own church in his own time.

* A school would be within its legal rights to sack a primary school teacher who refused to use a recommended storybook about homosexual marriage because it was against her religious beliefs.

* Parents would not have the right to insist for deeply-held religious reasons that their child be withdrawn from school lessons on the history of homosexual marriage.

* A church which would conduct only opposite-sex marriages could be stopped from hiring council-owned property.

* A ban by churches on homosexual weddings in church could be overturned under European human rights laws. Churches, in general, would be better protected from hostile litigation if they stopped holding weddings altogether.

* Because the Church of England is the established state church, the UK Government could be in breach of human rights laws if it allowed the Church of England to refuse homosexual weddings. The church would be in a safer position if it were disestablished.

* If homosexual marriage became law then it would have to be taught as part of sex education.

Legalising same-sex marriage would not be the end. Judging by what has happened elsewhere, legalising same-sex marriage would be followed by further demands, like allowing three or more people to marry each other and decriminalising incest.

Is it time, do you think, for 'bigots' and 'lunatics' to take a firm stand?

Caring - or killing?

Arguments about the Liverpool Care Pathway continue.

The Liverpool Care Pathway - the LCP for short - was developed in the 1990s following collaboration between the Royal Liverpool Hospital and the Marie Curie hospice. It is intended to unite the fields of physical treatment, psychological support, spiritual care and support for carers, bringing hospice-style care to patients in hospital in the last days or hours of life, "once it is known that they are dying."

It aims to allow the patient to have a peaceful death by avoiding unnecessary and burdensome medical intervention at the last. It permits the removal of medication, hydration and nutrition and allows the patient to be sedated until death takes place.

No problem, say doctors, when the LCP is used in appropriate circumstances combined with high standards of care. But there are complaints that continuous deep sedation may be being used, even quite widely, as unofficial euthanasia.

One survey of records found that in 23 per cent of deaths of people put on the LCP in one city there had been no definite diagnosis at any stage.

The NHS says discussions should always be held with relatives before the patient is placed on the LCP, and the condition of the patient should be reviewed every four hours.

A review of palliative care in hospitals found that in one hospital trust, fewer than half of relatives were told that patients had been placed on the LCP. In a quarter of trusts, one in three families were not told.

One doctor said that medical ethics varied in different parts of the country. Patients should be treated with common sense and sensitivity, but these were being replaced, she complained, by slavishly following protocols - what she called "tickboxitus."

One doctor said: "The diagnosis of being 'within the last hours or days of life,' which is necessary for a person to be put on the LCP, has no scientific basis. This diagnosis is, in fact, a prediction and as such is likely to be in serious error about 50 per cent of the time.

"Although it is possible to discontinue the LCP if the patient improves, it becomes more difficult to detect changes in underlying illness as a patient becomes more drowsy on the LCP."

A second wrote: "If all doctors were trained in the care of the elderly and had all the time in the world to discuss end-of-life care with patients and relatives there would be less cause for anxiety about the LCP. But given the current pressure on hospital beds and the number of frail, elderly people needing attention, there is a very real danger that some who appear to be dying but have a treatable disorder will be put on the LCP with fatal results. . .

"Patients are in danger. . . The NHS is fast becoming a death service rather than a health service for the elderly. . . People can no longer be sure that the elderly will be treated well."

A third doctor added: "The question has never been whether the LCP offers a 'peaceful' death. . . The issue has always been whether patients are dying prematurely by being put on the LCP. While the LCP claims it is for those in the 'last few hours or days of life,' it is essential to realise that there is no accurate way of determining this, so that for most patients it is at best a guess with large margins of error. This is particularly true for the two thirds of patients who do not die of cancer. Such patients might well have had weeks or even many months more of life had they been properly supported rather than put on the LCP."

ALERT, the anti-euthanasia organisation, is producing cards that people can carry saying they do not wish to be placed on the Liverpool Care Pathway.

Some hospital patients are being treated by conscientious staff as carefully and as well as busy hospital conditions allow. Others are not.

You would be surprised how many cases have been brought to my attention of old people who have gone into hospital with relatively minor ailments and within a few days have been dying.

If you have a relative in hospital, ensure that he or she is being hydrated, and fed if appropriate. You would think it would be unnecessary to do that in this enlightened age, wouldn't you? It is not.

The Middle East: tensions mount

A pre-emptive strike by Israel on nuclear facilities in Iran in October appears increasingly likely.

Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said again that the primary foreign policy goal of his government is to see Israel wiped off the map of the Middle East. "A new Middle East will definitely be formed."

A new report by the International Atomic Energy Agency says that Iran has two new groups of centrifuges installed at its fortified underground facility at Fordow, signalling a doubling of the site's capacity, despite diplomacy and sanctions, since May. DEBKAfile says that by the end of September or early October Iran will have enough 20 per cent-enriched uranium for its first nuclear bomb.

Israel's Security Cabinet had a 10-hour meeting last week to discuss the threat from Iran. Israeli citizens, who have been standing in queues for gas masks for their families, are increasingly fearful that war will soon be upon them.

Ehud Yaari, a respected Israeli analyst, said American officials see an Israeli strike on Iran before US presidential elections in November as almost a foregone conclusion, and are concentrating on their response to the outcome.

The Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot said the US has informed Iran through intermediaries that the US will not back an Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear facilities as long as Iran refrains from attacking American interests in the Persian Gulf.

US President Obama would like Israel to believe that the US is serious about military action "when the need arises" - but when the need arises is the crux of the dispute between Israel and the US. "Sparks and lightning " were reported to have been flying at a meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US Ambassador Dan Shapiro. Prime Minister Netanyahu made it clear that the Israeli Government does not trust the Obama administration to stop Iran's nuclear programme in time.

"The world tells Israel, 'Wait, there's still time,'" the Israeli PM said on Tuesday. "And I say 'Wait for what? Wait until when?' Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don't have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.

"Now if Iran knows that there is no red line, if Iran knows that there is no deadline, what will it do? Exactly what it's doing. It's continuing, without any interference, towards obtaining nuclear weapons capability and from there, nuclear bombs."

President Obama was proposing to meet Prime Minister Netanyahu on September 27, presumably to ask Israel to hold off, while Israel would ask for backing in dealing with Iran. Now President Obama has refused to meet him. 

Tensions over Iran are said to have caused the most severe rift in US - Israel relations for decades.

Israel is aware of Hezbollah with its thousands of rockets in Lebanon, Hamas with its thousands of rockets in Gaza, and the possibility of attack from Syria - all of them influenced by Iran. Israel does not want to start a war. But neither will Israel sit and wait indefinitely to be bombed into oblivion.

"Pray for the peace of Jerusalem" (Psa 122:6).

The case of Rimsha Masih

Charges of desecrating the Koran or blaspheming the prophet Mohammed can be a matter of life or death in Pakistan for those accused.

It is not uncommon for charges of blasphemy to be used against the poorest minorities - no blasphemy charges have been filed, for instance, against Zoroastrians, the most educated and well-off minority community in Pakistan - in order to settle personal scores or as an exercise in religious prejudice.

Rimsha Masih is a mentally handicapped girl, said to be 14 - some claim she is only 11 - from a Christian family. Her parents are said to be street sweepers. Some reports say Rimsha is unable to read.

Three weeks ago a Muslim shopkeeper alleged to have a score to settle with Rimsha's sister went into a mosque with a plastic bag containing burnt paper Rimsha had been collecting which had come from a book which included Koranic texts.

A Muslim mob entered the mainly Christian area where Rimsha lived calling for the death of unbelievers. Some 50 families fled the neighbourhood. Rimsha and her sister were severely beaten.

Rimsha was imprisoned, charged with desecrating the Koran, and was said to be deeply traumatised by her ordeal. Her parents are in hiding. There was sympathy for the girl because of her age and mental disability.

Then came an unusual development.

Witnesses claimed an imam at the mosque had mixed torn pages from the Koran with the burnt pages in Rimsha's bag to strengthen the case against her and help rid the area of Christians.

In an unprecedented move, the country's leading body of Muslim clerics, the All Pakistan Ulema Council, then spoke out in favour of Rimsha. The imam has been arrested and is expected himself to face charges under blasphemy laws.

On Friday, Rimsha was granted bail and taken to a safe house. She will still have to face the charges. Even if acquitted, she will not be able to return home. Guilty or not, people accused of blasphemy have met with death at the hands of Muslim vigilantes.

The case has become something of an international cause celebre, and may lead to some review of blasphemy laws in Pakistan.

Even so, it is not easy to speak out against the laws. Two senior politicians in Pakistan have been assassinated for doing precisely that.

Freedom for Yousef Nadarkhani

Pastor Yousef Nadarkhani, who was sentenced to death in Iran in 2010 for apostasy from Islam and who refused to renounce his Christian faith despite facing the death penalty, has been released.

He is 34 years old. He was charged in 2009 with having left the Muslim faith and converted to Christianity. He had never been a practising Muslim, but his parents were Muslims, which the court said was sufficient. He was sentenced to death in 2010.

When his case appeared before the Supreme Court in 2011, he was told he could be released if he renounced his Christian faith. Each time he was asked, he refused to do so.

It was announced he would be brought back to court this month to face further charges. At his appearance on Saturday, the apostasy charge was dropped, and he was sentenced to three years' imprisonment for evangelising Muslims. As he had already served three years, he was released and reunited with his wife and two young children.

Said Christian Solidarity Worldwide, one of the organisations who campaigned for his release: "While we rejoice at this wonderful news, we do not forget hundreds of others who are harassed or unjustly detained on account of their faith. CSW is committed to continue campaigning until all of Iran's religious minorities are able to enjoy religious freedom as guaranteed under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Iran is party."

The death penalty was not carried out doubtless because of the weight of international prayer and protest. Thank you to all who took part.

* CSW pointed out that whilst Pastor Nadarkhani was released, others in Iran are still suffering.

Pastor Behnam Irani, serving a five-year sentence for allegedly undertaking missionary work, is reported to have suffered torture and beatings, to have been found several times unconscious in his cell, and to have been denied medical treatment.

Pastor Farshid Fathi is serving a six-year sentence in Teheran's notorious Evin prison.

Well, prayer does change things

Whoever said that prayer changes things said a great deal in very small space.

We're already at the seventh of September, so time to mention that on September 29 tens of thousands of Christians from all over these islands will travel to Wembley Stadium for the National Day of Prayer and Worship.

It is likely to be the biggest mobilisation of Christians for prayer in the UK for a generation, and one of the biggest gatherings of Christians in the UK for a century. Organisers hope 70,000 will attend.

An orchestra, a choir and a list of well-known Christian musicians will lead worship. Leaders of Christian organisations will lead prayers for key issues affecting Britain.

Details and tickets from www.ndopwembley.com.

Love never fails?

American preacher Dr Michael Brown heard there was going to be a homosexual protest a week last Sunday outside the local church where he worships.

The leader of the protest wrote on Facebook: "We will meet just before the service begins, and protest as they gather, we will have a silent protest as service is going and let them have it as they leave for the day. Remember we will be peaceful and respectful, something they don't understand. We are going to STAND TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY to show that our love is stronger then their hate."

In reponse, Brown wrote on his blog: "On behalf of FIRE Church, I want to extend to you the warmest welcome and let you know that we are thrilled that you are here with us on Sunday. We have been praying for you for a long time!

"As always, you will only meet with love, kindness, and respect from the FIRE leadership and congregants, and we proclaim to you once again the amazing grace of God. Jesus died to save us from our sins, heterosexual and homosexual alike, and only in Him can we find forgiveness, redemption, and transformation. Jesus alone is the Healer, Savior, Deliverer, and Transformer."

On his radio show, he encouraged them to come in good numbers so they could greet them.

Scott Volk, one of the church leaders, posted a note on the local homosexual website: "As the pastor of FIRE Church, I just want you to know that you'll be greeted with the same love and compassion as we always endeavor to show anyone. . .You make mention of the 'hate' that we show. Yet, in all our years here we've only desired to reach out with love to everyone in the local community here. . . Hopefully you'll see that love demonstrated on Sunday as you protest."

His note provoked some hostile responses, including one which said: "You can fool yourself, Mr Volk. You can fool your parishioners. But you can't fool God. He knows what's in your heart, and it isn't love. It's hate."

Volk responded by explaining the love of Jesus and inviting them to his home for dinner with him and his family. He explained that "to call someone hateful without ever meeting them, seeing them or hearing them speak, is an indication of a heart that needs love. I make myself available."

One replied: "I want to hear more about this Jesus," and another: "Even I would be welcome there? It would be an honor to meet Scott Volk and Dr Brown. I'm beginning to see light as very attractive."

On Sunday morning about 10 protesters showed up. Some of the church leaders met them, offered them water and snacks, shared God's love and truth with them and invited them to the service. After a few minutes they left, saying the church people were too nice and loving to deserve a protest.

The following day the leader of the protest telephoned Dr Brown's radio programme to apologise publicly for the protest, explaining that their anger was "aimed [in] the wrong direction." Then he said: "Once we got there Sunday morning we were greeted with absolutely perfect love. I mean, it was fantastic."

After the broadcast, Brown and the protest leader shared contact details, and are looking forward to sharing a meal together - and sharing their hearts.

Dr Brown suggests that the church leaders have not compromised their beliefs. The protesters, he said, have heard his radio broadcasts and read his writings, and recognise how strongly they differ on many issues.

Can it be that love is always the answer?

Broken promises

The apostle Paul said that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons (1 Tim 4:1);

that in the last days men will be lovers of pleasure more then lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power (2 Tim 3:1, 4, 5);

and that there will be a time when men will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, will heap up for themselves teachers, turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables (2 Tim 4:3, 4).

One of the signs of an approaching apostasy, some believe, is the rising promotion of homosexuality within the church.

Dr Gene Robinson, the American bishop who caused so much trouble in the Anglican communion by leaving his wife and living openly in a homosexual relationship, was asked recently why he should be taken seriously as an advocate for his position when he had broken the vow he took with his former wife.

He said he takes marriage "unbelievably seriously." When it became clear, he said, that his marriage was unnatural for him and he and his wife divorced, he and his wife went directly to their church, read apologies and gave back the symbols of their vows, the rings they had exchanged at their wedding 17 years earlier, in order to honour those same vows.

When a man and a woman appear before God and make marriage vows, God makes them one flesh. Poor Bishop Robinson's problem there is that there is no mechanism to reverse the process.

Some homosexuals are more belligerent. It is a shame when something is promoted in the nominal Christian church of which God so clearly disapproves.

But there does need to be love in the church too - as I shall demonstrate in the next post on this blog.

Another slippery slope?

I  have written here and here about my concerns regarding organ donation.

The only hearts, livers and pancreases used for transplantation are taken from donors whose hearts are still beating when the organs are removed. The donors used to provide organs have been certified as brain-stem dead. They are still breathing; their flesh is still pink and warm; they can process food and drink; a child certified as brain-stem dead can grow to sexual maturity; a pregnant woman certified brain-stem dead can maintain a healthy pregnancy. I do not believe that brain-stem death is in fact death.

Says Dr D. W. Evans: "The basis upon which a mortally sick patient is declared 'deceased' - for the purpose of acquiring his or her organs for transplantation without legal difficulties - is very different from the basis upon which death is ordinarily diagnosed and certified and that highly relevant fact is not fully and generally understood." And again: "The uncomfortable fact is that the brains of the so-called 'brain dead' are not truly and totally dead and the diagnosis does not exclude the possibility that some donors may retain or regain some form or degree of consciousness during the surgical removal of their vital organs. We just do not know."

What's more, potential organ donors and next of kin are led to believe that life support will be switched off and then the organs removed. That they are not told that the organs are removed before life support is switched off is unethical and immoral.

I do not object to people donating their organs for removal after their death if they wish to do so. The end, however, does not justify the means.

Currently there are more sick people wanting organ transplants than there are organs available. In an attempt to deal with the shortage, the Welsh Government is proposing to bring in legislation according to which all people living in Wales for longer than six months, including prisoners, tourists and students, will be deemed to have given permission for their organs to be taken for transplant unless they have specifically registered their objection. While it is needful now to opt in to the organ donor system, people then will be deemed to have given permission for their organs to be removed unless they have opted out.

The authority says that families will be consulted before organs are taken, but there appears to be no legal guarantee that organs will not be taken if families object.

Critics say that a similar change has not been effective in other countries;  that not everyone would be aware of the new legal situation; that the new legislation might lead to a lowering of standards to be met before organs are taken; and that informed consent is important in other medical matters and ought to be important here too.

The Welsh Government has organised a consultation on the proposed legislation. It is not confined to people living in Wales. Replies are required by September 10. Details and suggestions on how to reply are available here and here.

If you have concerns, will you not express them?

Misery - or life worth living?

Surely there could have been no other decision in the Nicklinson case in the High Court this week than the one that was handed down.

Tony Nicklinson, a 58-year-old from Wiltshire, has locked-in syndrome after a severe stroke. His mind is in perfect working order, but he can move only his head and his eyes. He is fed through a tube, and communicates through a computer which reads head and eye movements.

He says his life is "dull, miserable, demeaning, undignified and intolerable." He wants permission for a doctor to end his life.

Some have said that his case is a perfect example of the need for a change in the law on assisted suicide - but assisted suicide is not the question here. Mr Nicklinson is unable to commit suicide, even with help. Granting permission for his death would have the effect of legalising euthanasia. As the law stands, the one ending his life would technically be open to a charge of murder.

While expressing sympathy for him in his condition, Lord Justice Toulson said in the High Court: "To do as Tony wants, the court would be making a major change in the law. It is not for the court to decide whether the law about assisted dying should be changed and, if so, what safeguards should be put in place. Under our system of government these are matters for Parliament to decide."

Mr Nicklinson intends to appeal.

Commenting on  the case, bioethicist Michael Cook points out that the majority of people with locked-in syndrome want to live. He recalled Frenchwoman Maryannick Pavageau, who had locked-in syndrome and was awarded the Legion d'Honneur for her battle against euthanasia.

She denied her life was miserable.

"All life is worth living," she said. "It can be beautiful, regardless of the state we are in. And change is always possible. That is the message of hope that I wish to convey. I am firmly against euthanasia because it is not physical suffering that guides the desire to die but a moment of discouragement, feeling like a burden. . . All those who ask to die are mostly looking for love."