HOW TO AVOID PERSECUTION ‘A COMFORTABLE ABCD’ - Dr Alan Clifford

(!!! - presented thus to make a point)

A. Be sure your faith is nominal and ‘low profile’. Keep it for Sundays only. Why be fanatical?

B. Compromise your faith whenever it is likely to be demanding. Why make trouble for yourself?

C. Never question the religious opinions of others: be open to their insights. Don’t be too sure of your own beliefs. Be as broad-minded as possible.

D. Maintain a good reputation with all and avoid costly commitment to Christ. Be as nice as possible.

Examine Your Elders

Given the deplorable spiritual state of the Christian church in the west, and the fact that most people are outside the Christian church, even those who are members in her, the finger of blame must surely be pointed at the pulpit.  At least this is what DMLJ believed.  The pulpit is the reason why so many are outside the church.  People come looking for reality, but find pretence.


Teaching elders have the heavy responsibility of ensuring that the church is operating along biblical lines.  It is his and privilege, duty and responsibility for caring for Christ's church on earth.  That means that the elders should have a care for each other as well as for the spiritual well-being of the church.  This could show itself in the regular examination of the elders as to their walk with the Lord.

There are detailed examination questions that could be used to ascertain how church elders are living.  For example, the examination questions as used by the Welsh Calvinistic Methodists in the societies in the eighteenth century would be a good place to start.  Here, you will find the direction in which examination ought to go.

Careful probing is essential for the spiritual health of both the elders and the congregation, but this will only be done by those ministers who are committed to overall congregational and denominational health.  I have heard a leading evangelical imply that it doesn't matter if elders are spiritual and godly men or not - just treat them as if they are and give them spiritual responsibilities!  I could not believe what I was hearing.  In other words, these men are playing the children's game, "Let's Pretend."  But they are doing it within Christ's church.  They are playing religious games with the souls of church people, and one day they will have to give an account for their misdoings.  What irresponsibility! 

Why do elders not spiritually examine their fellow-elders?  Because in so many churches, there are elders who are deeply unspiritual, godless men whose mouths are utterly filthy, church elders who are notorious womanisers, blasphemers, men who curse and swear like anything.  Now what would Presbytery think and do to any such minister who reports that after careful examination, several elders were found not to be fit for office.  This would be met with utter horror.  Why?  Because Presbytery ordained these men to office within Christ's church, men who do not even belong to Christ.  Add to that the enigma of woman elders, and you have a real problem facing the church.

But then if (or since) the churches are Roman in their orientation, and by that I mean, if they believe in their own infallibility, what does such a massive mistake say about them?  They will not claim infallibility but they behave as if they are.  Only the RC church in Ireland admits to being fallible (vis-a-vis the clerical child sex abuse scandal that is still ongoing in Ireland and elsewhere where Rome has put down her roots), despite its official position of being infallible.  Infallible Protestant churches will not wish to admit that they have been wrong.  And of this you can be very sure: the firm's men will back the church to the hilt, regardless of how far from Gospel truth she has departed. 

For there to be even the beginnings of church reform there must be moral and spiritual courage on the part of teaching elders, for without clear guidance from God's Word, any actions will be disastrous.  The church needs to take a long and hard look at her condition if reform is to be commenced.  And the more difficult reform proves to be, the greater the need for it.

A Prayer for Mothers - Dr Charles R. Swindoll

"As one whom his mother comforts, so I will comfort you." —Isaiah 66:13

We do worship You, our Father, and in our worship we give You our thanks. We thank You, not only for our own mothers and grandmothers but for all women who have filled that role. We remember those who are now deceased, who helped shape our lives, who taught us faithfully, and who enduringly loved us. Thank You for the contribution of fine women all over this world who live lives dedicated to Your service, to their families, to their extended families. Thank You for each. You have written in Your Word that their "worth is far above jewels."

Thank You for the tenderness and compassion mothers contribute to a world that's cold and raw and careless and harsh. Thank You for their affirmation and words of affection in the midst of a society bent on high achievement, self-serving goals, and short-sighted pursuits. Thank You for their hours of investment in others. Thank You for their contribution to You in the work of the church down through the centuries. Thank You for using women through the ages to improve their homes, their families, and other's lives. Thank You for their vision, for their strength of character. Most of all, for their hearts, tender to You and affectionate toward those they love.

Dear Father, so many of these things represent Your wisdom which is, as You have written, more precious than silver—better than gold. In light of that, we rededicate ourselves to Your work, to Your service, and to those who need our love. We commit our future to You for however many months or years You may give us. May we faithfully and relentlessly serve the Master.

In the name of the Savior, we pray. Amen.

See also  Exodus 20:12 ; Proverbs 6:20 ; 20:20 ; 30:17 .

A Practical Means of Comfort

There is a sense in which it is very easy to become so spiritual that we cease to be of practical help to others.  Reformed spirituality is the most practical form that spirituality takes.  The milk of human kindness ought to flow through us to others in need, whether is it by visiting them, preparing meals, looking after children or the elderly, taking them out for a walk or shopping, or a thousand and one other practical things.

But there is a very simple something that can be done by yourself, if you are up to it, and that is to get yourself a house dog to keep you company.  This creature will be with you at all times, will welcome you when you come into the house after being out, will lie beside you on the floor, will beg for food when you're eating, will take you out for a walk, and will bring a ray of sunshine into your life.

This is exactly what we found with our new house dog, Connie.  She is a ruby King Charles Cavalier Spaniel.  My wife finds her to be a very positive distraction from her other concerns, and gives her an interest.  She follows her about the house and my wife always calls for her when she hides underneath the table, etc.

But it is possible to understand your dog in such a way that it makes the relationship more beneficial to all concerned.  Visit this website and have a look at the suggestions that Murray Haven makes as you try to get to know your dog better.  This is a relatively new book which I came across quite recently and I want to share its insights with you. 

If you are feeling stressed and crushed by your current circumstances, anything that will ease the pressure will be welcomed.  If you feel you cannot clear your mind from your pressing problems, then a positive distraction will help enormously.  This book will point you in the direction to do just that.

Pop Worship

Why is it that minister's have today given up their God-given responsibility for determining and leading the service of worship?  Why have ministers, even in evangelical churches, handed over responsibility for the content of the 'songs' that are used in services?  Why is it that musically talented church members have now been given the role of starting the service (no call to worship, mind you) and of ordering it?  Why have ministers transferred leadership of the service to untrained performers?

No one can provide me with a biblical answer to these questions.  The argument runs, of course, that we have to try to keep the young people within the churches, so we give them a place in running the service.  Further, in order to remove the allegation that the modern church is outdated, the church has resorted to the whole scale introduction of unadulterated worldliness as a means of helping the 'pop generation' to worship God.  Times change, they tell us.  We are now in the modern times.  What was useful in the last generation is no longer useful today.  We must change because times have changed and men have changed and knowledge has marched on.

So God's ancient way of salvation revealed in the Scriptures and through the death and passion of Christ, is irrelevant.  A new way is needed, and the contemporary church is working hard to discover or invent a new way of salvation.  They tell us that man has changed, that he is educated, sophisticated, advanced, has walked on the moon, has split the atom, has discovered DNA and so on.  He is scientific man, knowledgeable man, clever man.  We cannot offer to such a man the same old way of worshipping God that our fathers used.  He is used to short blasts of information, 'sound bites,' so sermons have to be cut and shortened.  If modern people cannot concentrate for more than 12 minutes, keep your sermons to no more than 12 minutes.  If he prefers pop music, rock music, soul music, with endless repetition of choruses, then give him those.  If he prefers music that is similar to that of modern culture - unsingable - then music used in Christian worship must have the same characteristics.

What lies behind this practice is that man has changed therefore how he approaches God must be changed accordingly.  What utter nonsense.  Man is still the same fallen creature he ever was since Gen.3.  He has not changed morally, except that he has plunged to a greater depth of immorality.

Then, the Scriptures have changed.  The number of new modern translations demonstrates that the Bible has changed, so how we approach God must change as well. 

Then, and most seriously, God and His Son Jesus Christ have changed.  Yes, the Bible says that God is the eternal God and Jesus Christ is "the same yesterday, today, and forever."  But no matter; we think He has changed so He must be worshipped in a new way, and what better to use than the music that modern worshippers are familiar with. 

Surely this is a confession by the evangelical church that Scripture is inadequate and its way of salvation is no longer appropriate to twenty century man.

Today, it is man's preferences that determine what worship is, not God's Word.  The Word is out of date.  It is no longer the main thing in church life today.  We need to 'soup it up.'  Whatever gets that result is what is right and to be used.

This is the situation today in many evangelical churches, churches that once stood for the Gospel pure and simple.  They have lost the plot entirely; and then they wonder why church attendance is falling.  They need to take a good long look in the mirror when shaving each morning to see where the true problem lies.

Sodomy Welcomed by Unionists?

Lord Ken Maginnis, in a recent BBC interview following his departure from the UUP, was very annoyed, and understandably so, at the way the party leadership dealt with him concerning his reasonable views on moral and ethical matters.  His views do not cohere with those of his party, but Ken has always been able to think for himself and to articulate his own views well, even though many disagreed with him and them.

However, one thing has been overlooked in much of the comment, and it's this: wherever there is a dalliance with liberalism of whatever kind, there is sure to be serious and bad consequences.  Ken, sadly, was on the liberal wing of the UUP, and it was this very wing that disagreed so violently with his views, precipitating his resignation from its ranks.

Let it be said clearly - and we see this in church as well as in the affairs of state - there are none so illiberal as the liberals.  Liberals live in a 'cloud-cookoo-land' kind of existence, believing that getting rid of traditional and time-tested and honoured principles and practices is the way forward.  It is not.  Such views may prevail for the short term, but in their wake will come nothing but calamity and disaster.  The churches have proved this, and so will practically all the parties at Stormont that embrace a liberal methodology. 

The unionist parties have removed men who were involved in relatively minor alleged misdemeanours, and then  proceeded to welcome IRA/SF into government - that is liberalism at its worst.  The Stormont executive has funded Belfast pride this year again, as has the City Council and, I believe, the PSNI.  This demonstration of unprincipled support for what is clearly wrong and offensive is another manifestation of liberalism which at its core is destructive of everything good and decent.

Have these liberal parties at Stormont or in Westminster any future?  Yes, they will be around for some time, because that is what the people want; but the damage they will do in the meantime to the very fabric of our society will have repercussions for generations to come. 

And the sad thing is this: party members and party supporters have colluded in this moral meltdown promoted by liberalism in all its forms and will support their chosen parties regardless of the damage they are doing to the country and people they profess to love.  May God have mercy on us in our wilful rebellion against His Word.

THE TRIALS OF THE TOPLESS DUCHESS - Dr Alan C. Clifford

What a sickening fiasco. French, Irish and now the Italians are cashing in on the hapless Duchess.

But are the British entirely without blame because we refuse to publish the pictures? No. Because this whole incident is but a symptom of our Europe-wide immoral, immodest culture, a culture where promiscuity, pornography and perversion flow unchecked. Indeed, our entire entertainment industry thrives on adulterous sex in particular and a mocking disregard for the Ten Commandments in general.

Of course the money-making motive is behind all this. 'Filthy lucre' is the apt expression. Not that there is anything filthy about feminine beauty. But the beauty of a man's wife should be for his eyes alone. The kind of decadence that ignores such privacy merely fuels public male lust and should be disallowed and even criminalized. Rightly did the Apostle Peter sum up the vice of our visual age. We are a society with 'eyes full of adultery, and that cannot cease from sin' (2 Pet. 2: 14). 

Is the refusal of the British press to publish (so far) evidence of a residual Puritanism? I certainly hope so. One would like to ask these hypocritical editors and their equally-hypocritical male readers this question: would they like topless pictures of their wives, sisters, mothers, etc available for all the world to see? And have they spared a thought for Prince William's feelings in all this shameless publicity? 

For those who see a relevant connection, I am not making any concessions to Islamic culture at this point; behind the seemingly-modest burkha barrier is a variety of sexual irregularities. No, I  am appealing to the kind of Judeo-Christian values which once prevailed in great measure throughout Western society, values which preserved and protected the purity and beauty of married life, at the same time creating a context of innocence and modesty in which to raise happy and virtuous children. Such are the desperate needs of our sex-obsessed society.

Unless we return to our roots, the lusts of the jungle will be our ruin!