Bible exhibition 2

At our Soul Winners Convention Dr David Allen put on display a replica of a timeline of the English Bible. 

Bible exhibition Part 1

At our Soul Winners Convention Mr Alastair Bonar, one of our members, put on display a number of old Bibles he owns.

Thought for the day

Faith, without trouble or fighting, is a suspicious faith; for true faith is a fighting, wrestling faith.

Attributed to Ralph Erskine, well known Scottish preacher in Reformed circles, who lived from 1685-1752. 

Sandown FPC wins its court case on Sodomy

It has been announced today in the Belfast High Court that Sandown FPC has won its case against the Advertising Standards Agency. A good day for the truth and freedom of expression!

To read details of the case and the ruling please click on the following links:

Church advert breached code

Church challenges sodomy ad ban

Judge overturns ASA sodomy ad ban decision

Updated 23/03/11
The Newsletter & Belfast Telegraph have further reports on this court case

Newsletter - Victorious minister will not be gloating

Belfast Telegraph - Church’s anti-gay advert was freedom of expression: judge

What are they so afraid of?

The Guardian reports that the new 'Free Schools' being encouraged by the coalition government will not be able to teach Creationism in any science classes. Not that I ever expected they would be!

For fuller details click - Free schools will not teach creationism, says Department for Education

This surely begs the question: what are these secular educationalists afraid of? Can evolution not stand up to scrutiny in the classroom? If creationism is the outlandish notion of fundamentalists as they claim then surely it will be easily seen to be the case when considered alongside evolution, if evolution is indeed scientific fact as they claim. After all, truth is never afraid of the searchlight, it is falsehood that loves the dark and loves to go unchallenged.

It would seem that these secular educationalists are somewhat afraid that when their pet theory, which at its core is fuelled by an innate desire to reject the existence of God, is examined alongside alternative explanations for the origin of the universe it might be found wanting. That it might be discovered to be less than scientific fact. 

If evolution & creationism were both taught would it be discovered that evolution is also a faith based belief. This has been acknowledged in the past by evolutionists. 

For example in the introduction to one edition of Darwin's The Origin of Species it says:

The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproven theory - is it then a science or a faith? Belief in the theory of evolution is thus exactly parallel to belief in special creation - both are concepts which believers know to be true but neither, up to the present, has been capable of proof. 

L. Harrison Matthews, FRS, Introduction to Darwin's Origin of Species, J M Dent & Sons Ltd, London 1971, page xi.

If evolution is faith based then creationism has the same right to be examined in the science classroom as evolution.

School Choir singing at 60th anniversary regional rally

Some photos of the joint school choir [Bangor & Newtownabbey Independent Christian schools] which took part in the 60th anniversary regional rally in Martyrs Memorial FPC last night.

Practising beforehand in the Paisley Jubilee Church

Taking part in the service

What did St Patrick really believe? Part 3

Here is a link to a sermon preached some years ago on the subject:

What did St Patrick really believe?

For Transcript of Part 1 click here
For Transcript of Part 2 click here


Transcript Part 3

II. Patrick’s teaching on the matter of salvation. 

The most important matters are: what did he teach about the matter of salvation? What does he teach about Jesus Christ? That will be the chief test of his orthodoxy. We have his creed to consult which is available from his confession.

Patrick had a deep and accurate knowledge of the Scriptures. You cannot read his confession through without marvelling at the rich knowledge of the Word of God which he possessed, even though he confesses: I have not read like others, who have been well imbued with sacred learning. He certainly had read his Bible.

It is God’s Word alone that is to direct us in the matter of salvation.

He believed in the deity and Godhead of Jesus Christ. It was Patrick who is renowned for illustrating the doctrine of the Trinity by the use of the shamrock. While preaching before the king of Meath at Tara he illustrated the mysterious doctrine of the Trinity by the three-leaved shamrock.

The belief in the doctrine of the Trinity necessitates the acceptance of the deity and Godhead of Jesus Christ and the personality of the Holy Ghost. You cannot have a Trinity of persons without there being equality of the persons in that Trinity. He had right views of Christ and the Holy Spirit. His confession is distinctly Trinitarian and evangelical.

He believed in the necessity of being born again. Another quote from his confession states: 

I am greatly a debtor to God who hath vouchsafed me such great grace that many people by my means should be born again to God and clergy should be ordained everywhere for them. I pray those who believe and fear God, whosoever may condescend to look into or receive this writing which Patrick the sinner, though unlearned, wrote in Ireland, if I have done or established any little thing according to God’s will, that no man ever say that my ignorance did it, but think and let it verily be believed that it was the gift of God.

He believed himself to be a sinner and that all sinners are in need of being born again.

He became an evangelist. His name is associated with many places both north and south of Ireland. Temple-Patrick, Down-Patrick, Sea-Patrick, Croagh-Patrick, Leck-Patrick, Inch-Patrick. There is also Patrick’s chair in the Clogher Valley.

He knew what it was to trust God. From his writings it is clear that he had a strong belief in the guiding and overruling providence of God. He accepted the providences of God that brought him away from his family and as a slave to ireland. He accepted that this affliction ‘corrected’ him and brought him to ‘know God’.

He learned the truth of this text of Scripture: And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me, Ps 50:15.

In his day of trouble on the slopes of Slemish he cried to the Lord for salvation and the Lord delivered him and he went on to glorify the Lord by a life lived to the service of God and man.

May this island again redound to the sound of the gospel which Patrick preached. May God be pleased again to move among the Irish with such God glorifying results.

The creed of St. Patrick 

As given in His own confession:
I am not able, nor would it be right to be silent on such great benefits and such great grace as [God] hath vouchsafed unto me in the land of my captivity, for this is our recompence, that after we have been corrected and brought to know God, we should exalt and confess His wondrous works before every nation which is under heaven

God the Father 
that there is none other God, nor ever was, nor shall be hereafter, except God the Father, unbegotton, without beginning, from whom is all beginning, upholding all things as we have said

God the Son
and His Son, Jesus Christ, whom we acknowledge to have been always with the Father before the beginning of the world, spiritually with the Father, in an ineffable manner begotton before all beginning

Christ the Creator 
and by Him were made things visible and invisible; and being made man, and having overcome death, He was received into heaven unto the Father

Christ the preeminent One
And the Father hath given unto Him all power, above every name, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord and God

Christ the coming Judge
Whom we believe and we look for His coming, who is soon about to be judge of quick and dead, who will render unto every man according to his works, and hath poured into us abundantly the gift of the Holy Ghost and the pledge of immortality, who maketh the faithful and obedient to become sons of God the Father and joint heirs with Christ. Whom we confess and worship, one God in the Trinity of the sacred Name. For He Himself hath said by the prophet: Call upon me in the day of thy tribulation and I will deliver thee. 

What did St Patrick really believe? Part 2

Here is a link to a sermon preached some years ago on the subject:

What did St Patrick really believe?

For Transcript of Part 1 click here

Transcript Part 2:

I. He had no connection whatsoever with Romanism. 

Roman Catholicism loves to speak of Patrick as one of their own. They call chapels by his name, they place his statue above entrance doors, attired in full ecclesiastical costume, with a great mitre on his head and a formidable crozier in his hand. These are articles of dress which the simple missionary in all probability never either saw or wore. What is certain is that he had no connection whatsoever with Romanism.

Romanism was not known in Ireland at the time of Patrick. Rome can hardly with justification make a claim on Patrick when history teaches us that Romanism itself was not established in Ireland to many years after Patrick lived. In fact the Papacy was only developing on the continent of Europe at the time of Patrick and not fully developed there until c.a. 600 AD.

Biblical Christianity had come to Britain with the serving soldiers of the invading Roman armies. The Roman armies left in 410 AD. Romanism only came to Britain with Augustine arrival at Canterbury in 597 AD, at least 100 yrs. after Patrick’s death. The story is told of Augustine’s attempt at bringing the Celtic Church under his and Rome’s control. The Celtic representatives had previously decided that whether Augustine rose up from his seat when meeting them would indicate whether they were meeting as equals or not. Needless to say he did not rise to meet the Celtic representatives so they wanted nothing to do with him.

Romanism only came to Ireland around 1100 AD when Pope Adrian give Ireland as a dowry to the then English King to subdue and bring under the control of Rome.

Patrick never claimed Papal authority. In his confession which exists to this day we have in some detail the circumstances under which he came to Ireland. There is not a word said about either Rome or the Pope. An omission which would be simply inconceivable if he had been an emissary of the pope. With the success that he enjoyed surely Rome would have taken credit if she had sent him. Many letters of Pope Leo I from 440-461 are extant yet say nothing about Ireland and Patrick. He himself never appeals to any papal commission when his authority was challenged.

He was ‘Presbyterian’ in Church order. Patrick ordained bishops in every Church he founded. Some say it was 365 churches, others that it was 700 churches he founded. Whatever the total it is undenialable  that for every church Patrick founded he ordained bishops. This Presbyterianism not Prelacy or Popery.

His family did not believe in celibacy. Patrick states that both his father and grandfather were ecclesiastics, yet both were married. They were hardly following a cardinal doctrine of Romanism.

No mention of the other tenets of Romanism. In Patrick's writings there is no mention whatsoever of auricular confession, purgatory, the honour of Mary, the mass or any anointing of the dead or any other distinctive Roman Catholic doctrine.

He never was primate of Ireland. It is well known that neither in Patrick’s day or for hundreds of years afterwards was there any such person as either an archbishop or bishop of Armagh. Even Episcopalian writers acknowledge this.

One thing we can be absolutely sure about regarding Patrick - He was no Romanist!

To be continued

What did St Patrick really believe?

Here is a link to a sermon preached some years ago on the subject:

What did St Patrick really believe?

Transcript Part 1

March 17th is designated as St. Patrick’s day in which the patron saint of Ireland is supposed to be remembered. More and more this day is being marked by parades, festivals and carnivals which in the main are but an excuse for a day of worldly entertainment, sinful pleasure and amusement during which liberal measures of alcohol are consumed. Much of what takes place has very little connection if any at all with the life or preaching of St. Patrick.

St. Patrick is believed to have been a native of mainland Britain, Scotland it seems has the strongest claim as the place of his birth, during the early part of the 5th century.

As a young lad, at the age of 16, he was taken captive by raiders from his father’s farm and brought to Ireland and sold as a slave, where it is believed he tended sheep on the slopes of Slemish. His captivity became a means of blessing. It was the means of bringing about the conversion of his soul. Ireland may not have been the land of his natural birth but it was certainly the land of his spiritual birth.

We are privileged to have two works which have come down to us from the hand of Patrick. They are his ‘Confession’, and his ‘Letter to the Christians’. In his confession he has the following to say about his conversion to Christ:

I knew not the true God, and I was carried in captivity into Ireland.... and there the Lord opened the sense of my unbelief, that even though late I should remember my sins, and be converted with my whole heart unto the Lord my God.

After six years of slavery he escaped from his master, and making his way to the coast, procured a passage on board a boat, and after enduring many hardships, was able to be reunited with his parents in Scotland.

However he was not to be long in his father’s house. He had witnessed the darkness of Ireland and desired to bring it some of his light. A remarkable dream which he had led him back to Ireland. In his dream he saw a man coming to him as if from Ireland, whose name was Victoricius, bearing innumerable letters. He gave one to Patrick and the opening words were The voice of the Irish. As he read this in his dream he heard a call coming from the western sea: 

We entreat thee holy youth, to come and walk henceforth among us. 

Finally he made up his mind to return to Ireland as a missionary and spent the remainder of his days here. He is believed to have died on 17th March either 465 AD or 493 AD. He is said to be buried in Downpatrick. 

There is a local connection with St. Patrick and Templepatrick. According to tradition St. Patrick, during his time in Ireland is thought to have baptised converts at an ancient well in the village and is credited with founding a Church which stood in the area of the old graveyard, where the Templetown Mausoleum now stands.

What did St. Patrick really believe? We can discern this from his works.

To be continued

The unscripturalness of observing Lent

Titus 3 v 5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost. 

Today is the beginning of Lent. Much reference is made to this observance. Sadly many Protestants are more and more being taken up with this religion of works.

I. The definition of Lent. 

Lent is the 40 day period before Easter, excluding Sundays, it begins on Ash Wednesday and ends on Holy Saturday, the day before Easter Sunday. This year Lent begins on 9th March and will end on 23rd April.

Sundays are excluded because this is the day on which Christ arose from the dead, making it an inappropriate day to supposedly fast and mourn over sin. On Sunday we must celebrate Christ's resurrection for our salvation. It is Friday on which we commemorate His death for our sins. The Sundays of the year are days of celebration and the Fridays of the year are days of penance.

There are 40 days in Lent because 40 is the traditional number of discipline, devotion, and preparation in the Bible. Thus Moses stayed on the mount of God for 40 days, the spies were in the land for 40 days, Elijah travelled 40 days before he reached the cave where he had his vision, Nineveh was given 40 days to repent, and most importantly, prior to undertaking His ministry, Jesus Christ spent 40 days in wilderness praying and fasting, Matthew 4:2.

Since Lent is a period of prayer and fasting, it is supposedly fitting for Christians to imitate their Lord with a similar 40 day period of penance. Christ used this 40 day period of prayer and fasting to prepare for His ministry, which culminated in His death and resurrection, and thus it is supposedly fitting for Christians to imitate Him with a 40 day period of prayer and fasting to prepare for the celebration of His ministry's climax, Good Friday and Easter Sunday. 

II. The purpose of Lent. 

Lent is observed as part of the system of Romanism that believes that salvation is obtained by human effort through the sacraments of the Church. They speak of imitating Christ. It is the old falsehood of penance, showing sufficient sorrow for sin to merit the favour of God. 

The key to understanding the meaning of Lent is simple: 

Preparation for Baptism and for renewing baptismal commitment lies at the heart of the season. Lent is about conversion, turning our lives more completely over to Christ and his way of life. That always involves giving up sin in some form. The goal is not just to abstain from sin for the duration of Lent but to root sin out of our lives forever. Conversion means leaving behind an old way of living and acting in order to embrace new life in Christ. Lent is the primary time for celebrating the Sacrament of Penance, because Lent is the season for baptismal preparation and baptismal renewal. 

During Lent a person is apply ashes to show association with sorrow for sin. 

III. The unscripturalness of Lent. 

Search the Scriptures diligently, from Old Testament to New, and you will find no mention of Jews or Christians observing an annual period of 40 days of fasting and abstinence preceding the festival of the Passover, yet today most of the Christian world observes a 40 day period called Lent. Christ fasted forty days before His earthly ministry began not before His death. 

It is actually the mark of apostate religion to command to abstain from meats, 1 Timothy 4:1-3.

Roman Catholicism states that the reasons for celebrating her major feasts, when they do, are many and varied. However:

In general it is true that many of them have at least an indirect connection with the pre-Christian [pagan] feasts celebrated about the same time of year, such as Christmas and Easter. 

They also acknowledge that no observance of Lent is found in the early Church.

Where did the concept of Lent come from then? The 40 days abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess and her son. This is where the 'mother and child' idea comes from.

Numerous examples have been found in history of the old pagans observing a period to mark the birth of spring. The Babylonians, Egyptians, and others among them. It was usually preceded by a feast called a 'carnival'.

Lent is part of the concept of salvation by works and sacraments. However, salvation and peace with God are not obtained in this way. That which the Lord Jesus would have us to do is come and confess our sins to Christ and be saved from them for ever. 

In this text of Scripture we are simply taught the way of salvation. There is no great mystery about it, yet it is becomes the hardest thing for men and women to discover because of the pride of the human heart.

1. Salvation is not by human effort. Paul rules out works of righteousness which we have done as a means of obtaining salvation.

It is in our fallen nature to want to do every thing for ourselves. It is a basic lesson every child has to learn as they grow up, namely that they cannot do everything by themselves. They may want to, they may push away the help that is offered but they will have to learn that help is required.

The same mentality is applied to the matter of salvation. Sinners want to play at least a part in their salvation. They are happy for God to do a part and they also want to do a part. Not so. It is not by works.

It is not even by works of righteousness. People in general have their own definition of good works. It varies from one person to another. In doing so these people are convinced that God will be pleased and His favour obtained. Not so according to this text of Scripture. Surely Lent falls into that category.

2. Salvation comes from God’s mercy. Man cannot merit or earn salvation. Neither does he deserve it.

There is nothing is us that would attract God’s blessing. The only thing we deserve is to be cast away from Him as an unclean thing. Nothing that we do will ever bring us to the place where God will find us worthy of His favour.

Therefore we should stop trying and have done with all that is associated with this false way of salvation.

Salvation is by free grace. Salvation is the free gift of God. It flows from God’s infinite mercy, love and grace. We cannot earn it but we can receive it as a free gift. God out of the abundance of His mercy has provided salvation. He moved first towards fallen mankind. Man does not merit it, God freely bestows it.

Sinners need to fall upon God’s mercy and obtain salvation in this way, Micah 7:18.

3. Conversion is by the Holy Spirit. You do not grow into conversion as Rome claims.

Salvation is by the renewing of the Holy Ghost. It is the Spirit of God that makes dead sinners alive. He renews that spiritual life which died in Adam when he sinned. Spiritual life is brought into our hearts once more by the Spirit.

Conversion is not a process but an act. Conversion takes place in an instant. A sinner is either dead or alive. He/she is not in between somewhere. He/she is not half alive or half dead.

Salvation is by the washing of regeneration. Regenerating grace is here meant. We need to be born of the grace and power of the Spirit. It is comparable to washing with water for its purity and cleansing virtue, hence all who are regenerated and sanctified, are said to be washed and cleansed, having their hearts purified by faith, and their consciences purged from sin by the blood of Christ.

It is the washing of regeneration we need to save us from our sins not the washing of water. It is only the blood of Jesus Christ that will cleanse from sin. 

Titus 3:5 teaches a different ay of salvation as compared to what lies begin the concept of Lent. 

Interesting News Items

Some interesting news items:

1. Britain has the most anti-family tax system in Europe

Daily Mail - How UK offers the worst tax deal for traditional families
ConservativeHome - Britain has most anti-family tax system in Europe

2. Britain’s abortion laws currently leave vulnerable women without the most basic support and help to which they should be entitled

ConservativeHome - Nadine Dorries MP

3. Equality Commission has to apology for its smear of Christians.

Christian Institute - Equality Commission sorry for Christian ‘infection’ jibe

Equality and Human Rights Commission - website statement

Johns v Derby City Council
3 March 2011

Earlier this week the case of Johns v Derby City Council, in which the Commission had intervened, attracted some attention. Unfortunately a mistake within our legal submission led to an inference that we did not intend and which was misconstrued as suggesting that the Commission equates Christian moral views with an infection. This oversight was caused by a drafting error in our submissions to the court. This should have been picked up in our internal clearance process for the legal documentation and does not represent the position of the Commission in any way.

Furthermore, the Commission entirely rejects any view (as reported in the media) that rights in relation to sexual orientation ‘take precedence’ over religious rights. The Commission fully upholds the rights of looked-after children to be supported in their chosen religion or that of their family, in the context of the paramount importance of the welfare of the child.

The Equality Act provides protection against discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief as well as on the grounds of sexual orientation and the Commission has producedextensive guidance to explain this legislation, which was introduced by Parliament.

The Commission has written to Mr and Mrs Johns to apologise.

Can you imagine the outcry there would have been in the media if this had been the other way around and a church or minister had branded sodomy 'an infection'? We would have had every liberal 'do-gooder', human rights spokesperson etc, etc branding such comments as homophobic etc. Yet when it is Christians who are slandered in this way there is not a cheep out of any of them. So much for equality!!

Sunday trading laws consultation

There is presently a consultation taking place by the Department for Social Development regarding the extension of Sunday trading laws.

The Independent Orange Institution has made its views known here.

We would encourage Christians to make their views known on this subject. Submissions can be made to:

Social Policy Unit
Department for Social Development (NI)
4th Floor, Lighthouse Building
1 Cromac Place
Gasworks Business Park
Belfast
BT7 2JB
Telephone: (028) 9082 9521
email: social.policy@dsdni.gov.uk

Submissions must be received by the Department of Social Development no later than 8th April 2011.

Special Soul Winners Convention

For over 30 years our congregation has held our Soul Winners Convention meetings. This year we are marking the 400th anniversary of the translation of the Authorised Version.

Thought for the day from C. H. Spurgeon

I came across this quote from C H Spurgeon today:

The devil has seldom done a cleverer thing than hinting to the Church that part of their mission is to provide entertainment for the people, with a view to winning them. From speaking out as the Puritans did, the Church has gradually toned down her testimony, then winked at and excused the frivolities of the day. Then she tolerated them in her borders. Now she has adopted them under the plea of reaching the masses.

Christian Institute Statement on Christian Foster Case

The Christian Institute has sent out the following release about the Christian Foster case involving Mr & Mrs Johns

The media has reported the case of Mr and Mrs Johns, a Christian couple who faced difficulties in fostering children because of their views on homosexuality.

Much media reporting on this issue, and even some comments by Christians, have, in our view, been wide of the mark.

The impression has been given that the High Court has ruled that Christians who believe that homosexuality is morally wrong cannot foster children. This is not true. No such ruling has been made.

Christians are deeply concerned about the dramatic comments by the High Court judges in this case. It is no surprise that national newspapers are drawing attention to what has been said. Derby City Council seems to want a gay rights test to assess any potential foster parent. If so, this Council will be encouraged by the High Court, but thankfully other councils are free to take a different view.

Equality laws have closed down adoption agencies and are now being used against pillars of the community, such as Mr and Mrs Johns in this case and Mr and Mrs Bull, the Christian B&B owners from Cornwall.

The last government created a conflict of laws. It is for Parliament to unscramble this conflict. That is what we want to see.

Let us pray for those in authority that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. (1 Tim 2:1-4).

Let us also pray that those in authority will defend vulnerable children and give them the opportunity to be raised in a loving home.

A full statement by The Christian Institute is available here.

What is specifically wrong with new versions? Part 3

A comparison can be made between some verses in the Authorised Version and the corresponding verses in the new versions where the full extent of the attack that has been made upon the fundamental doctrines of the Word of God is demonstrated.

The nature of the changes.
1. The Deity of Christ.
1 Tim 3:16: 
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh… AV
No one can deny how great is the secret of our religion. He appeared in human form… GNB
Beyond all question, the mystery of godliness is great: He appeared in a body… NIV

Rom 14:10,12: But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.
So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. AV
You, then, why do you judge your brother or sister? Or why do you treat them with contempt? For we will all stand before God’s judgment seat.
So then, each of us will give an account of ourselves to God. NIV

These texts in the Authorised Version emphasis that Christ was God of very God. However, modern version change these verses thus removing the clear testimony of Scripture to the fact that Christ was God manifest in the flesh.

2. Eternal Sonship of Christ.
Micah 5:2:
… yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. AV
… But out of you I will bring a ruler for Israel, whose family line goes back to ancient times. GNB

… out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from old, from ancient times. NIV

'Ancient times' does not necessarily mean eternity past. This accommodates those who deny the eternal sonship of Christ. 

Hebrews 1:5:
Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? AV

You are my Son; today I have become your Father. GNB

You are my Son, today I have become your Father. NIV

The eternal sonship of Christ is attacked here. God did not become His Father as these new versions state, He was always His Father.

3. The Virgin Birth.
Isa 7:14,
Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. AV
A young woman who is pregnant will have a son and will name him 'Immanuel'. GNB
Behold a young woman shall conceive and bear a son and shall call his name immanuel. RSV

Luke 2:33:
And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him. AV
The child's father and mother were amazed. GNB
The child's father and mother marvelled. NIV

There is a weakening of the evidence for the virgin birth. Joseph was not Christ's father. That is a blasphemy which undermines the whole work of redemption. If Christ was not safeguarded from original by virtue of His virgin birth then He could save no one but had his own sin to answer for.

4. The Atonement.
Col 1:14
In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins. AV
By whom we are set free, that is our sins are forgiven. GNB
In whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. NIV

The reference to the blood of Christ which is essential to redemption is removed. The blood atonement was one particular doctrine hated by Westcott and Hort.

There are many of other places where changes like this occur. Surely this is no coincidence in the light of the fact that the revising committee set out to make doctrinal changes. They certainly accomplished their purpose.

The number of changes.
The text which the New International Version and the Good News Bible come from shows multitude of changes.

There are 481 changes which substantially affect the meaning. There are 44 changes which involve doctrine. There are 212 changes to the names of Deity, 75 changes to the name of Jesus, 44 to the name of Christ, 35 for Lord, 32 for God, 26 for other names of deity. More than 150 pronouns which refer to Deity are omitted. This cannot be incidental!

The Greek text underlying the New Testament in modern versions is approximately 2,500 words shorter than the Greek text underlying the New Testament in the Authorised Version. This is nearly 2% of the whole. It is the equivalent of removing 1 and 2 Peter from the Bible.

The sad conclusion to come to is that modern translations are corrupt Bibles because they come from corrupt manuscripts translated by corrupt men with corrupt motives.

No believer who loves the pure Word of God should have anything to do with them.

Why we use only the Authorised Version of the Scriptures Part 2

II. Why a raft of new translations? 

The lay person has his/her reason for new translations - the Scriptures must be made more understandable, more easily read etc. That is a false premise in itself for natural man will never understand the Scriptures by himself, no matter what versions are made available. The work of the Holy Spirit is needed.

But we need to dig a little deeper to find out the real reasons why new translations have come unto the market.

Over a period of years there were a number of new translations leading up to the A.V. 1611 and its editing of 1769. From then until the late 1800s there was no new translations. In 1881 a new Greek text was issued by Westcott and Hort and there followed what was known as the Revised Version. From then till now these new versions have multiplied. What were the real reasons for a new translation?

1. To facilitate ecumenism. At the time when the Revised Version appeared the Oxford Movement was in full flow with its Romanising tendencies. There was a clamour among ecumenists to have the Authorised Version superseded. The Revisionists by and large were in full sympathy with the Oxford Movement.

The Revised Version appeared in the form of a 'Common Bible', the first page said in large letters: AN ECUMENICAL BIBLE. The New English Bible which appeared sometime later stated in the preface that its goal was: the promotion of the ecumenical church and the oneness of the people of God in all sorts of Churches worldwide. The Authorised Version was too much a Protestant Bible and this would never do in the new ecumenical, Romanising climate that was developing.

Examples of this ecumenical facilitation is found in the way in which these new translations treat specific texts: The Good News Bible/Today's English Bible puts Peter as the rock. The New International Version has a footnote that says Peter is the rock. The New English Bible puts the word 'tradition' in 1 Cor 11:23 which gives justification for the mass.

2. A hatred of the truth. Westcott and Hort were the two main Revisioners. Hort gloried in the fact that a Unitarian had been invited unto the Committee. Had he been forced to resign when this became more widely known Westcott would have resigned with him. 

Both denied the vicarious atonement and the bodily resurrection of Christ. Hort called it 'an immoral counterfeit of the truth'. They both favoured the Larger Hope, Darwinism and O.T. Higher Criticism. Westcott said: No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history. Hort said: I am inclined to think that no such state as Eden existed. They were on record as saying that they fully intended to bring about doctrinal changes by their revisions. Sodomites later on sat on the New International Version translation committee. 

How can men who openly opposed and ridiculed orthodox Christianity ever be trusted to compile a new translation of the Scriptures? The Scriptures ask: Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one, Job 14:4.

3. A hatred for the Authorised version. The new translation was never about updating the words. It stemmed from a hatred of the Authorised Version. In 1851 Hort called the Greek text that underlay the Authorised Version: the villainous Textus Receptus. The full quote reads: 

I had no idea until the last few weeks of the importance of texts having read so little Greek Testament and dragged on with the villainous Textus Receptus. Think of that vile Textus Receptus leaning entirely on late manuscripts.

This was said even though he had read very little of the Greek N.T. Hort is said by other critics to have organised his entire argument to depose the received Text which underlies the Authorised Version. The man was prejudiced against this Majority Text. He believed that the most accurate texts were those discovered in the Vatican and in a monastery on Mt Sinai. These were characterised by omissions. The reason they were the oldest was because they had been set aside as corrupt. Yet Westcott & Hort relied heavily upon them.

The modern translations come mainly from the manuscripts that had been discarded. A reading which has 80-90% support from the Received/Majority Text would be discarded in favour of a reading from these corrupt manuscripts just because it came from these manuscripts. Westcott & Hort showed a distinct prejudice against the Authorised Version from the very outset. The new translation wasn't an effort to provide a faithful translation it was a prejudiced attempt to discard the Authorised Version.

Free Presbyterian Church's official response to Peter Robinson's comments

The following statement has been issued by the Moderator and Clerk on behalf of the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster:

In light of recent criticism the Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster wishes to publicly reaffirm its opposition to the Roman Catholic service commonly termed ‘The Mass’. In this ecumenical age, the false notion is propagated that there is little difference between the Roman Catholic Mass and the simple Communion Service as practised by Protestants. However, there is a vast difference. The historic creeds of Protestant Churches underline this difference by referring to the Mass as ‘blasphemous’, ‘idolatry’ and ‘injurious to the work of Christ.’

The reason for these statements is that the Mass purports to be a continuation of the sacrifice of Christ. It leads sinners to trust in the priest, the Mass, and the church rather than in our Lord Jesus Christ, the Great High Priest who made the one perfect sacrifice for sins forever (Hebrews 10v12). His is the only sacrifice that can deliver from sin.

Our objection to attendance at the Mass has nothing to do with bigotry or lack of respect for others as our critics often claim. During the funeral service of Princess Diana, the Chief Rabbi, on a point of religious principle, declined to enter the Cathedral and was praised for showing his respect by going as far as the entrance. Yet we and other Evangelical Protestants are often castigated and denigrated when, out of love and loyalty to our Saviour, we cannot countenance the ‘sacrifice of the Mass.’

Moderator: Rev Ron Johnstone

Clerk: Rev Ian Brown


Update
Rev Thomas Martin, minister of Lisburn FPC, has also made some comments about this matter calling on Peter Robinson to reconsider his statement, as reported in the Newsletter, see here

Update [Friday 25th Feb]
The Newsletter have carried a report on the statement which the Officers of Presbytery released, see here

Someone else sees the folly of Peter Robinson's position

The news media are carrying the story that Peter Robinson has let it be known that he would attend a Roman Catholic mass.
To read more see Newsletter & Belfast Telegraph

Mr Wallace Thompson, a DUP member and former adviser to Nigel Dodds, on behalf of the Evangelical Protestant Society, released a statement which is on their website

NO EVANGELICAL PROTESTANT SHOULD EVER ATTEND THE POPISH MASS 

The Evangelical Protestant Society fully respects the principles of civil and religious liberty, but our long-standing position as a Society is that no evangelical Protestant should attend the Roman Catholic mass under any circumstances.  We hold to the mainstream historical view as summarised by, for example, the Westminster Confession of Faith and the Thirty-Nine Articles.

It will therefore come as no surprise that the Evangelical Protestant Society does not share the First Minister's position on this matter. 

We note that the First Minister has stressed that his decision is a personal one and that others of his colleagues might have a different view.  In light of this, we would therefore hope that no attempts will now be made by the usual suspects to demonise or persecute those evangelical Protestants who come to conclusions contrary to those of Mr Robinson.

21 February 2011

At least someone else sees the folly of this 'new politics'. It may please the Romanists and the ecumenists in society but it will not please God. Peter Robinson's new views and the historic Protestant position can't both be right. One or the other must be wrong and it is not the historic Protestant position. 

The 'Rubicon' was crossed in 2006 when Peter Robinson and others thought it all right to share power with those whose trade has been murder and mayhem in this Province for 40 years. With that sacrifice of principle the floodgates have opened. It will be one issue after another where historic Protestant Biblical positions are jettisoned. What will it be next: abortion, Sunday opening?

It is mere semantics for Peter Robinson to say that 'I wouldn’t be going as an act of worship, I would be going as an act of respect for the individual'. He may well indeed be paying his respects but he is also attending an act of worship. Every Roman Catholic funeral is a mass. The 39 articles of the Church of Ireland rightly state that the mass is 'a blasphemous fable and a dangerous deceit'. No right thinking, God honouring, Bible believer would want to presence themselves where such a blasphemy was being enacted. 

This blasphemy is directed at Jesus Christ. The mass claims to be a reenactment of Calvary which the Bible teaches was a finished work needing no repetition. To attend the mass is therefore no insignificant matter. The honour of Jesus Christ and His finished work is at stake. 

It seems political calculation is more important than Bible principle!

Why we use only the Authorised Version of the Scriptures Part 1

This year marks the 400th anniversary of the completion and publication of the Authorised Version of the Bible. This mammoth task was commenced in 1603 and completed in 1611.

Nowadays in virtually every Christian Bookshop you enter you are meet with an array of versions of the Bible. There are a plethora of modern translations which have in the last century flooded unto the market. In most shops there is the Authorised [King James] Version, the New International Version, the Good News Bible, the New English Bible, the Revised Standard Version, the American Standard Version etc.

These new versions are supposedly produced with the professed intention of making the Scriptures more up to date and more modern. There are arguments about words and phrases and terminology. One claim the supporters of these modern translations make is that they are supposed to make the Scriptures more understandable and more easily acceptable.

However the question to be asked is: does it matter which of these versions an individual chooses to buy and read? After all are they not all the same with only variations in the use of words? Will it aid and assist someone in their understanding and acceptance of the Scriptures to use these modern translations?

They are not all the same. There is a fundamental difference between the Authorised Version and these others which we have mentioned. A difference so great that it takes these other versions outside the pale of what can be called a faithful copy of the Holy Scriptures.

In the Free Presbyterian Church we use only the AV. Not only that but we oppose the use of any other version of the Scriptures in the English language. We believe that the AV. is the most faithful English translation of the original manuscripts. Why should we change that which is most faithful to the original and use something inferior.

I. The importance of this subject

This is not a matter of personal taste. The issues involved go far beyond mere personal preference. It is vitally important that we have the true Word of God from error and corruption.

It is important because of the use and purpose of the Scriptures. Because of man’s fall into sin, we has lost the ability to discern and understand the God of heaven from the natural revelation, Psalm 19:1-6.

God in His mercy purposed to redeem a people to Himself but natural revelation will never reveal to man that glorious truth of saving grace. It is only by that special revelation which God has given in His Word that will bring man to a knowledge of his need and an understanding that salvation is found in Christ alone, Psalm 19:7-14, Romans 10:17.

It is this Book which reveals Christ as the only Saviour of sinners. It reveals the work which Christ has done. It reveals the need of saving faith in Christ alone. It is the Scriptures which do this. Any corruption of these things will therefore be fatal.

It is important because of the attack that will be mounted against God’s Word. Paul indicates the reality of this in 2 Cor 2:17: For we are not as many, which corrupt the word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in the sight of God speak we in Christ. Note what he teaches:

[1] Many will interfere with the Scriptures. 

[2] This interference will lead to the corruption of the written Word. ‘Corrupt’ = to adulterate [to water down]. 

[3] This was prevalent in Paul’s day. 

With the corruption of the Scriptures will come the corruption in the Church. We have got to realise that the Bible forewarns us of an attack upon the Scriptures. The modern form of that attack is seen in the glut of modern translations. There are the devil’s attack upon the Word of God.

To be continued

The foolishness of Romanism knows no end

Roman Catholic Church leaders are relying on the blood of late Pope John Paul II's to heal Robert Kubica and hasten his return to Formula 1 motor racing before the end of the season.

Click here to read the full story

It is utter nonsense to believe that the blood of any mere human being can help another. The blood of the last Pope or any other pope or supposed saint for that matter has no merit or efficaciousness. 

This was the nonsense that was rejected at the time of Protestant Reformation. J A Wylie's History of Protestantism is replete with details of the gimmicks Rome used in the past to deceive her people into thinking that the popes and saints could help them. 

As every individual is a sinner before God and unable to do any spiritual good of themselves they have no merit for themselves never mind have any to pass on to any one else. 

New Moderator announced

The Belfast Telegraph have announced that the next moderator of the Presbyterian Church will be Rev Ivan Patterson, minister of Newcastle Presbyterian Church, Co Down who has been nominated by 12 out of the 19 Presbyteries.

There follows a short biographical sketch of his life and achievements. One piece of information lacking is whether he preaches the gospel or not? Or will he be like the outgoing incumbent Norman Hamilton who is more at home running back from Africa to get introduced to the pope.

Church volunteer status saved

The Christian Institute is reporting a significant victory obtained in the supreme court today.

They report:
I am pleased to give you some good news about an issue supported by our Legal Defence Fund. Following an important ruling in the Court of Appeal, volunteer Sunday school teachers, church elders, deacons, prayer group leaders and all other church volunteers have been saved from an avalanche of equality diktats. The Christian Institute intervened in the case and urged the Court of Appeal not to treat volunteers as though they had the same rights as employees under a European Equal Treatment Directive.

Read more here

A telling headline!

Now some people are more equal than others: 

Despair of Christian hotel owners penalised 

for turning away gays

The Daily Mail reports on Peter & Hazelmary Bull losing their court case.

The Christian Institute has a number of reports:

1. Judge rules against Christians but allows appeal

2. Christian owner reacts to court ruling

Stats

Since May 2009 Blogger has added a new feature that provides stats for each blog.

Here is an update on locations from which this blog is accessed since then.

Dancing in the Bible

There is a form of dancing that is Scriptural and a form of dancing that is sinful. 

William Wilson in his Old Testament Words Studies indicates that there are four Hebrew words associated with dancing in the Old Testament:

1. Chagag - 1 Sam 30:16 And when he had brought him down, behold, they were spread abroad upon all the earth, eating and drinking, and dancing, because of all the great spoil that they had taken out of the land of the Philistines, and out of the land of Judah.

Wilson defines this word to mean: moving with various turns and agitations in token of joy. 

2. Chowlah - Ex 15:20 And Miriam the prophetess, the sister of Aaron, took a timbrel in her hand; and all the women went out after her with timbrels and with dances.

He defines this word to mean: to turn or to twist, perhaps with music in distinction from that without music.

3. Karar - 2 Sam 6:14-16 And David danced before the LORD with all his might; and David was girded with a linen ephod. So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting, and with the sound of the trumpet. And as the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal Saul’s daughter looked through a window, and saw king David leaping and dancing before the LORD; and she despised him in her heart. 

He defines this word to mean: to move nimbly.

4. Raqad - Job 21:11 They send forth their little ones like a flock, and their children dance.

He defines this word to mean: to leap, to skip. to dance for joy.

W. E. Vine in his expository dictionary of New Testament words indicates that there are two words associated with dancing in the New Testament. 

1. Orcheo - Matt 14:6 But when Herod’s birthday was kept, the daughter of Herodias danced before them, and pleased Herod.

Vine defines this word to originally probably to mean: to lift up as of the feet, to leap with regularity of motion. 

2. Chorus - Luke 15:25 Now his elder son was in the field: and as he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing.

Vine defines this word to mean: an enclosure for dancing; hence a company of dancers and singers. 

1. Scriptural dancing

There is the dancing of Miriam and David, Ex 15:20; 2 Sam 6:14-16.

i. This type of dancing involves a rejoicing before the Lord. It is a jumping for joy. It says David leaped and danced before the Lord. 

ii. You never read of men and women dancing in this fashion together in the Bible. In fact the first place where dancing is mentioned in the Bible [Ex 15:20] it emphasises that Miriam led the women out to sing the same song that Moses had led the men in singing a little earlier. This also happened when David was returning from the defeat of Goliath, 1 Sam 18:6. It was single sex jubilation before God. 

iii. In one place it is a person dancing on their own, Jud 11:34.

iv. In some places it is the unmarried women who danced, Jud 21:21-23.

This is a long way short of what passes for dancing today among the ungodly.

2. Sinful dancing

This is the dancing of the Israelites at the foot of Mt Sinai when they were worshipping the golden calf, Ex 32:19 And it came to pass, as soon as he came nigh unto the camp, that he saw the calf, and the dancing…. This dancing was accompanied with nakedness, Ex 32:25 and denounced by Moses as sin, Ex 32:21. The Egyptians performed some of their religious rites in this indecent manner and the Israelites were now imitating them. 

This is the revelling of the Amalekites as they celebrate the conquest of Ziklag, 1 Sam 30:16 And when he had brought him down, behold, they were spread abroad upon all the earth, eating and drinking, and dancing, because of all the great spoil that they had taken out of the land of the Philistines, and out of the land of Judah.

This is the dancing of Herodias' daughter before Herod that pleased that wicked man and his male companions so well, Mark 6:22 And when the daughter of the said Herodias came in, and danced, and pleased Herod and them that sat with him, the king said unto the damsel, Ask of me whatsoever thou wilt, and I will give it thee.

There are certainly times when God so blesses His people that they leap for joy. However, the dancing that is associated with immodesty, revelry, lust and for entertainment ought to be avoided by the Christian as a manifestation of the pleasure crazes of this world. The Bible exhorts us to flee from the appearance of evil, 1 Thess 5:22.

Pleasure crazes of the world:

1. What is wrong with the Christian attending the cinema or the theatre?

2. Dancing

Thought for the day

Backsliders begin with dusty Bibles and end with filthy garments. ... C. H. Spurgeon

Tokens for good!

More often than not it seems that the stand for Christian values suffers setbacks. Thankfully here are two cases in which the opposite is true. We thank the Christian Institute for all their labours to defend and maintain our civil and religious liberties.

1. Birmingham street preacher wins wrongful arrest case

An autistic Christian street preacher who was handcuffed and arrested for speaking out against homosexuality and many other sins has been awarded £4,250 in damages following a court case against West Midlands Police. Read more on the Christian Institute website.

2. Cumbria Police payout for arrest of Christian

In a second similar case in recent days, a Christian street preacher has won £7,000 plus costs from Cumbria Police in settlement for a claim of wrongful arrest, unlawful imprisonment and breach of his human rights. Read more on the Christian Institute website.

Guesthouse owners sued over double bed policy

The Christian Institute has asked for prayer for owners of a Cornish Guesthouse who are due in court next court on Monday.

The owners of a Cornish guesthouse are due to appear in court on Monday because they restrict double bed accommodation to married couples.

Peter and Hazelmary Bull are being sued by homosexuals, Steven Preddy and Martyn Hall, who claim the policy is discriminatory.

The guesthouse is not just a business, it is also Mr and Mrs Bull's own home.

The case will be heard at Bristol County Court on Monday 13 December and is scheduled to last for two days.

The claim is brought under the Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations, the same laws that have caused faith-based adoption agencies to close down or drop their religious ethos.

If the claim against the guesthouse is successful, Mr and Mrs Bull may be ordered to pay up to £5,000 to Mr Preddy and Mr Hall for injury to their feelings.

Mr Preddy and Mr Hall's legal fees are being paid by the Government-funded Equality and Human Rights Commission. The Christian Institute is funding Mr and Mrs Bull's legal defence.

This case could determine whether Christians are permitted to operate B&Bs that restrict double bed accommodation to married couples.

Prayer is requested:

For Peter and Hazelmary Bull, that they will know God's love and support during this difficult time.

For the judge, that he will come to a just decision.

For our legal team, that they will present the case clearly and persuasively.

For the news media, that they will publish balanced and accurate reports.

For the staff of The Christian Institute, as we support and advise Peter and Hazelmary. 

For more information download a fact sheet about the case here.

The sabbath day under attack again

Social development minister Alex Attwood has said it is time to take a fresh look at the current 1pm to 6pm restrictions for larger shops in Northern Ireland. In doing so he hopes to boost the economy, benefit tourism and encourage regeneration of towns and city centres. Read the whole article here. 

The idea that extra opening hours will boost the economy, etc. is simply ludicrous. There will be no extra money spent by shoppers. It will just be spread over a longer shopping period. What is spent in larger shops will be taken away from smaller ones. There are also all the additional costs associated with longer opening hours.

Sadly this is simply another attack upon the sanctity of the Lord's day. The sabbath was made for man and not man for the sabbath. We are commanded to: Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. Man is robbing God when he takes the sabbath day and uses it for himself instead of setting it aside for the worship of the Lord. 

Sabbath desecration comes at a cost. The spiritual, physical and material well being of people will be aversely affected by neglecting the sabbath day. The closing chapter of Nehemiah illustrates the point very effectively:

In those days saw I in Judah some treading wine presses on the sabbath, and bringing in sheaves, and lading asses; as also wine, grapes, and figs, and all manner of burdens, which they brought into Jerusalem on the sabbath day: and I testified against them in the day wherein they sold victuals.
There dwelt men of Tyre also therein, which brought fish, and all manner of ware, and sold on the sabbath unto the children of Judah, and in Jerusalem.
Then I contended with the nobles of Judah, and said unto them, What evil thing is this that ye do, and profane the sabbath day?
Did not your fathers thus, and did not our God bring all this evil upon us, and upon this city? yet ye bring more wrath upon Israel by profaning the sabbath.
And it came to pass, that when the gates of Jerusalem began to be dark before the sabbath, I commanded that the gates should be shut, and charged that they should not be opened till after the sabbath: and some of my servants set I at the gates, that there should no burden be brought in on the sabbath day.
So the merchants and sellers of all kind of ware lodged without Jerusalem once or twice.
Then I testified against them, and said unto them, Why lodge ye about the wall? if ye do so again, I will lay hands on you. From that time forth came they no more on the sabbath.
And I commanded the Levites that they should cleanse themselves, and that they should come and keep the gates, to sanctify the sabbath day. Remember me, O my God, concerning this also, and spare me according to the greatness of thy mercy, Nehemiah 13:15-22.

We remember ....

Today is Remembrance day. 

We gladly honour the memory of those who by their death maintained our civil and religious liberties.

The tomb of the unknown soldier in Westminster Abbey

Response to Peter Robinson's comments on Education

I have been asked repeatedly over the weekend by a number of media outlets to comment on Peter Robinson's remarks about education.

Here is the full text of the response I gave to the Newsletter yesterday. They have included a little of what I said in a report in today's edition.

1. Peter Robinson is right to highlight the unjustifiable advantages, privileges and special arrangements that Romanism is given in the field of education in Northern Ireland. 100% funding is available to no other religious group that I know of.

2. His language about church schools being a ‘benign form of apartheid’ are however totally unacceptable, if he includes the FPC schools in that description.

i. If the state sector of education doesn’t offer an education in accordance with what the Word of God commands, then every Bible believing Christian has every right, and a duty, to stand apart and run their own system of education. This is not a ‘benign form of apartheid’ but obedience to the Word of God. 

ii. The state sector is presently secular, evolutionary, & man-centred in its ethos and therefore ultimately falls short of true education, For the LORD giveth wisdom: out of his mouth cometh knowledge and understanding, Prov 2:6. True education begins with a knowledge of God as He has revealed Himself in His holy Word. 

iii. The Bible clearly teaches the principles of separation. This is a fundamental starting point for evangelical Christianity. The born again believer is in the world but not of the world. We are to stand apart, ecclesiastically, morally, and educationally. This has been the historic position of our Christian forefathers.

We have been here before. This is not a new idea. Dr Henry Cooke [A Presbyterian minister back in the mid 1800s] had a great controversy over the issue of joint education.

iv. It is disingenuous for Peter Robinson to equate race and faith based views. To segregate on the basis of race is unbiblical, God hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth…, Acts 17:26. 

To stand apart on the issue of faith is the essence of Bible religion. In fact, God pronounces a blessing upon it: Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly, nor standeth in the way of sinners, nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful, Ps 1:1.

3. Peter Robinson draws a parallel between the higher level education and primary or secondary schools.

i. He fails to appreciate the importance of education in these early formative years. The older someone grows the more they should be able to discern between what is truth and what is error. In early years there is the additional aspect of a pupils' character forming. 

ii. If there was a Christian University/College holding to evangelical principles then I would certainly encourage Christians to attend there. This is due to the fact that sinful example has a detrimental effect upon the youth. So much behaviour is learned by watching others. God commands us to be wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil, Rom 16:19; Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things, Phil 4:8. Sadly many state educational institutions fall far short of this exhortation.

Historically, many of the state schools and universities originally started out being run and funded by Churches. It is the state who are the recent converts to education and not Churches.

iii. It must be remembered that education is not neutral. All education must have an ethos which underpins it. Secular education seeks to send out into the world those who are of a secular outlook. This is unacceptable for a Bible believer. God commands the Christian to raise their children with a Biblical worldview, to fear God and to serve Jesus Christ. The born again believer who wants to obey God has presently no option but to stand apart and place their children in an environment that honours God and has the Bible as its foundational textbook.

iv. State education has in the past been used to further the aims of politicians in solving the ‘troubles’ in Northern Ireland. Education for Mutual Understanding was set up by the Department of Education with the purpose of eliminating differences and points of distinction on the foolish premise that this would solve Ulster’s troubles. It was an attack upon evangelical Christianity.

The state is not neutral, that is impossible for any form of education. The ethos of the state system of education is contrary to the evangelical Christianity. 

4. Christian legislators are required to rule by the Word of God and particularly the Moral Law of God, Rom 13:1-10 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 

If they fail to do so then it can be legitimately asked: what is the point of electing them in the first place if they acquiesce in or even push a secularist agenda?