Cranmer: Canon Andrew White: “You have got to be prepared to die for your faith”

Cranmer: Canon Andrew White: “You have got to be prepared to die for your faith”.

Saw this on BBC ‘Newsnight’ last evening.  Andrew White tells it like it is – Dreadful. Very sobering reading from Cranmer. He is right, Christians do seem to be sidelined.

Radical Islam in the House

I’ve started listening to The Janet Mefford Show, downloading (Available through iPlayer) to listen on the way to work. I listened for the first time to Dr Oliphint (Covenantal Apologetics) on the show and was pretty shocked by some of the other stuff – particularly the Homosexual ideology and Islam. I was a bit skeptical to begin with, the concern was if Janet was a fundamentalist nutcase. Some of her callers gave me that impression. But I have to say she has some excellent guests and to be honest I now lament afresh the fact there is nothing like it over here in the UK. It would probably be shut down over here as a show that promotes hate speech – even though that’s far from the truth. Disagreement is becoming more and more problematic. I heard via another online broadcaster (not Janet) the term ‘Gaystapo’ for the first time to describe the Homosexual lobby / agenda / ideology. Whilst the term may not be that helpful I think we get the point. Basically, disagree and expect to be dealt with. And it’s really no different when it comes to Islam. The cry of Islamophobe is fairly common here – we had it from the BBC Question Time audience just last Thursday – compete with (measured) applause.

Back to the point of the post. It was on Janet’s show (yesterday I think) I heard an interview with Dr Michael Coffman to discuss his book ‘Radical Islam in the House’. Whether he went too far in his prognosis is hard to say, but if 10% of what he says is true America (Could be too late for us, unless the Lord graciously steps in) seriously needs to wake up – and fast. I know nothing of Michael Coffman but I’m about to order the book on kindle – here’s the blurb below:

Product DetailsProduct Description
Radical Islam In the House exposes the very real Islamist threat to America. It’s no longer lurking at America’s door, it has already penetrated deeply into the federal government and our culture. The over arching goal of the leadership of every major Islamic sect is to create a global Caliphate or world government.

Iran wants to create world chaos to allow the Shi’ite Muslims to form a Shia Caliphate. While allowing Iran to obtain the nuclear bomb will be catastrophic, there is an equally dangerous Islamist cancer that is systematically Islamizing American politics and culture; Wahhabi Islam.

Saudi Arabia’s Wahhabi Islam is the foundation of al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood. Al Qaeda uses violence, while the Muslim Brotherhood uses stealth and deception. By preying on political correctness, they have convinced most Americans they are peaceful, share the same God and want to coexist. While peaceful coexistence may be what the average Muslim wants, it is not true of the Islamic Brotherhood leadership. The Brotherhood has a well-developed, step-by-step plan to turn America into an Islamic controlled nation within a few years as part of their world Caliphate.

Nearly all Muslims believe that the return of the Mahdi, their messiah, is eminent. When that happens he will lead Islam into global conquest and a global Caliphate. This story quite literally leaps off the pages of the Bible in ways non-Jews, Christians and even Muslims will find shocking.

Very few Americans know that Obama’s Kenyan family is steeped in Wahhabi Islam, or that prior to the 2008 election Egyptian TV and radio bragged that a Muslim was going to be president. The implications are stunning and should be understood by everyone — before it is too late.

Cranmer: Syria’s al-Qaeda freedom fighters invade Christian village

Cranmer: Syria’s al-Qaeda freedom fighters invade Christian village.

Follow the above for Archbishop Cranmer’s Blog post. Once again this story like most others involving Christian persecution will probably go unnoticed. Cranmer’s concluding paragraphs are:

Under the protection of the mystical Shi’a-Alawites, Syria’s ethnic and religious minorities have been relatively free to live and worship. This will not be the case under the Sunni-Wahhabis (my emphasis). We know that Assad has stockpiles of chemical weapons. He may have used them, but it is by no means certain that he has. What is certain is that the ‘rebels’ which the US and France are about to assist are itching to get their righteous hands upon them (my emphasis). Syria’s nuns do not want to be bombed: a group have written

The Pope has spoken up, patriarchs and bishops have spoken up, numberless witnesses have spoken up, analysts and people of experience have spoken up, even the opponents of the regime have spoken up…. Yet here we all are, waiting for just one word from the great Obama? And if it weren’t him, it would be someone else. It isn’t he who is “the great one,” it is the Evil One who these days is really acting up.

If the US and France assist Syria’s ‘rebels’, Maloula’s nuns and all those who shelter in its convent will eventually be gassed to death in Al-Qaeda’s final solution (my comment: with help of President Obama). Their equation for salvation is simple: Christians + Sarin = Allahu Akbar.

Afghan MPs call for death of converts | Barnabas – Christian persecution

Afghan MPs call for death of converts | Barnabas – Christian persecution.

You don’t often hear this in the news, but here’s a sample:

Afghan MPs have issued threats in parliament against converts from Islam to Christianity, calling for them to be killed in accordance with sharia law. (My Comment: And this is the same Sharia law Muslims want here in the UK & USA)

The matter has been raised twice in recent debates, principally focused on Afghans who are living in India. Many converts to Christianity have fled there, fearing persecution from the Afghan authorities and the Taliban. There are around 250 in Delhi, where a growing Afghan church has been established.

On 15 July, MP Abdul Sattar Khawasi – who has previously called in Parliament for the public execution of Christians – referred to the evangelistic work that is being carried out by the Afghan church in Delhi and said that the Afghan government should put pressure on its Indian counterpart to provide a list of Afghans who have converted to Christianity there.

He said that the Afghan authorities would then be able to arrest and punish these Christians if they returned to Afghanistan in the future, highlighting Quranic verses that prescribe the death penalty for those who leave Islam.

In another parliamentary session on the subject two days later, MP Nazir Ahmad Hanafi called for all Afghan converts to Christianity to be hanged to stop the conversions that were happening in India.

Parliamentary speaker Abdul Rauf Rahimi ordered the country’s national security services to take serious steps to stop the spread of Christianity.

(My Comment: Most MP’s over here just don’t (or don’t want to) understand what they are supporting. Actually, a Turkish friend of mine says they – the Government – know exactly what they are doing)

Egypt seeing “worst persecution of Christians since 1321” | Christian Concern

Here’s an extract:

Accounts

Bishop Nazir-Ali said: “The accounts I’m getting from Christian leaders are the exact opposite of what we’re seeing in the media (my emphasis). 

“What we have had are not only peaceful demonstrators, but the use of mosques as arsenals with women and children being used as a shield.

“This is a well known tactic of radical Islamists all over the world and we shouldn’t be surprised that it’s being used also in Egypt.”

Follow link to read the full article.

Egypt seeing “worst persecution of Christians since 1321” | Christian Concern.

Definition of ‘Anti-Christ’

 

Mao at Stalin's side on a ceremony arranged fo...
Mao at Stalin’s side on a ceremony arranged for Stalin’s 70th birthday in Moscow in December 1949.

In the last post I used the term ‘Anti-Christ’ and thought rather than just leave its interpretation a matter for speculation it seemed like a good idea to very briefly supply a definition.

This is probably one of those doctrines that continues to generate large amounts of heat. So if you are looking for someone to debate your take on the issue you will be disappointed. Leave a comment by all means but don’t expect a reply as I’m not getting into a never-ending debate about dates and signs of the end.

So for those that are sitting on the edge of your seats – here it is:

My simple understanding is that when the machinery of the State is used to persecute Christians – there you have the Anti-Christ. We don’t see it as the early Church did with the Emperor Nero, or Stalin, or Chairman Mao: but we do see the beginnings of it albeit in many cases more subtly expressed but in a sense no less powerful. Remember the purpose is to destroy the Church, and if the Church can be made to look ridiculous, or bigoted, unloving, or just fundamentalist nut-jobs it’s perhaps even more successful.

So it’s in the above sense that I use the term Anti-Christ and see no reason for the term not to be used of David Cameron, Nick Clegg, their cronies and of this Parliament.

To counter the spirit of Ant-Christ however, we have the word of the Lord Jesus where He said ‘I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’ (Matthew 16:18). Perhaps our Government will have a short-lived success but in the end it will be the Lord Jesus that will prevail – Praise God!

 

Definition of Marriage and Freedom of Speech – Part 2

Continued from Part 1. I begin with the final quote from Stephen’s lecture manuscript.

And so, late in 1660 “Foreseeing clouds to gather blackness over these nations and the Lord in the way of his Providence to threaten his churches and interest with a flood of trouble and persecution, both Mr Ashwood with the rest, endeavoured to incorporate themselves into one body before the storm did fall”.

English: Nick Clegg and other MPs
English: Nick Clegg and other MPs (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The point I would wish to make – and did discuss with Stephen after the lecture – is the fact we are seeing a very similar set of circumstances evolve before our eyes.

We have been told by the Prime Minister that Churches need not fear. But, we should not forget that David Cameron is first and foremost a politician and an opponent of the Gospel of Christ. He has no interest in Evangelical Doctrine except where it will further his interests. And, let’s also remind ourselves that just like Charles II Cameron will have ‘to meet the demands of the powerful individuals and groupings who had engineered his’ Election as PM. This of course includes the Liberal Democrats led by the ungodly opposer of all that is sacred, Nick Clegg.

And so we find the following story:

A local councillor for the Green Party in Brighton is facing disciplinary action for refusing to vote in favour of same-sex ‘marriage’ in a local council meeting last week.

Christina Summers, a committed Christian, has been the target of abusive emails since making her view known, some suggesting she is mentally ill or describing her as a fascist.

She has made it clear she is “accountable to God above any political party” but Green Party members are looking for her to be expelled.

Go HERE for full story and media links. So much for Freedom of Speech there then!

And just the other day David Cameron not unexpectedly has said about Homosexuality, that ‘CAMERON ACCUSES THE CHURCH OF ‘LOCKING OUT’ GAYS, AND SAYS HE’S FOLLOWING BLAIR’S LEAD‘. I’d like to point out that the true Church does not lock out gays and never has. In fact we want them to come in and call upon God in faith and repentance just like any other sinner.

And again from Cameron – with encouragement from Nick Clegg no doubt – this story:  David Cameron “absolutely determined” to introduce ‘gay marriage’ by 2015. Go HERE for full story and media links. Here’s the fist two paragraphs:

David Cameron announced last night that he is determined to legislate for ‘same-sex marriage’ by 2015 and directly attacked the mainstream churches’ position on the issue.

Meanwhile, in a separate development, the Scottish Government this morning (25 JULY) announced that it intends to bring forward a bill introducing same-sex marriage in spite of strong opposition to the plans expressed in a recent consultation on the issue.

As Evangelical Christians we should prepare ourselves for the coming storm. It’s a time to Trust God as the dark clouds gather and ungodly policies are forced through the legal system. They have no justification for these ungodly policies other than that – they are ungodly and anti-Christ. They are the anti-Christ. If they were seekers after truth they wold not be able propagate their anti-Biblical, anti-Christ policies since without the Christian God there is no truth at all!

The conclusion of the above is – and we shouldn’t be surprised at this – the Government cannot be trusted just as it was back in 1660!

The days are upon us when Freedom of Speech is tottering over the Abyss. Why God has brought this upon I cannot say – but now is the time to ‘quit you like men’ and trust in God.

The government will do what the government will do, but will I have the freedom to disagree and call their policies ungodly. That’s the question. So far though, I do have the freedom to cast my vote with whichever party I choose – or none, At the moment it will be none, but definitely not one of the three main parties of the Greens.

Definition of Marriage and Freedom of Speech – Part 1

Back in March the relevance of one of the History Lectures is just too much to pass over. Here’s a direct lesson for us from the history of our own country. I’m very grateful to Stephen Rees for permission to quote from his lecture manuscript. I’ve edited it very slightly and the emphases in bold italics and brackets are mine, but here are a few quotations from the lecture to set the context:

…. Cromwell didn’t remove the concept of a state church.  What he did was to insist the state church must be as flexible as possible – he wanted there to be room for almost any group of truly evangelical Christians to worship within the state church according to their own convictions.  The way it worked was this.  He appointed a committee of 38 men known as the Triers.  A church – or any group of believers could put forward a man as a candidate to be recognised as the local minister.   And the Triers tried him – they assessed his suitability.  The only qualifications were that the candidate must be evangelical in doctrine and show evidence of a godly life.  It didn’t matter if he were a presbyterian or an independent, or a baptist or a fifth-monarchy man.  He could be appointed as minister of the local parish church – the local Church of England – he could be supported by public taxes, and he could lead the congregation according to his own convictions (My note: ‘his own convictions’ means according to the Bible).  Many Anglican ministers were ejected from their churches by local committees, because of their ungodly lives or non-evangelical doctrine – and evangelical men were installed by the Triers in their places.

(My Note: This system of appointed ‘Triers’ presupposed a disposition not only towards the truth of the Word of God (The Bible) but also to the belief that such a thing as The Truth existed. This is not so today. And nowhere is this seen so clearly than in our National leaders. What’s on show in the State Church and in Politicians is sheer unadulterated relativism.)

And this was the way that Bartholomew Ashwood, at the age of 38 came to Axminster.  Though he was operating within the state church, he had freedom for a little while to lead the church according to thoroughly Puritan, evangelical principles and to conduct worship according to his convictions.

But he knew that that freedom couldn’t last very long.  Why not?  Because in 1658 – since Ashwood had been admitted by the Triers, Cromwell had died.  Now the country was on the point of calling Charles II back from exile.  And Charles came from the line of the Stuarts who had persecuted consistent Puritans in England through two reigns.  Before he was brought back from exile, Charles II promised that he would allow religious freedom – “liberty to tender consciences”.  But men like Ashwood had no confidence at all in that sort of promise.  He was very well aware that freedom might be very short-lived.  Apart from anything else, whatever he promised, Charles would have very little freedom himself.  He (Charles) had to meet the demands of the powerful individuals and groupings who had engineered his return.

Ashwood and his friends were convinced independents, believing that each church should be a company of believers, governed by its members under the Word (The Bible).  Whether they were separatists, I think is unclear.  It may be that if Ashwood had been free to build such an independent church “according to gospel rule and the pure institution of the Lord Jesus” yet remain within the overall structure of the state church, he would have chosen that option.  But in any case he knew that that option was going to cease to exist.

This post is getting a bit long – So I’ll end it here. Link to Part 2.