- Obama’s Universalism - Or, all religions teach truth, and all religions teach Barak Obama?
- The responsibility of Prince William, the Crown he represents and of the New Zealand government
- Book Review, William Symington
- Criminalising Christian parents
- The Evil Nature Of The Anti-Smacking Law Proved
An analysis of Peter Hughes’ review- The legitimacy of the war in Afghanistan (1)
Resisting an unlawful government- What a wonderful thing that God in His providence bans Crucifixes through a European court
- Obama, Islam and Political Dissent
- Lowest Common Denominator Democracy And Socialism
- Had The US Followed Calvin's Advice On Usury???
- There is no such thing as luck
- J.I.Packer on the Anglican Debate Over Homosexuality
- The Westminster Confession Of Faith And The Cessation Of Special Revelation
- The WCF And Exclusive Psalmody 1
- The WCF And Exclusive Psalmody 2
- Keeping Up Appearances – Piercing And Tattoos
- Is The Creation Of Human/Animal Hybrids Legitimate Or Ethical Science?
- Obama’s Reasons For Keeping Christian Ethics Out Of The Public Square
- If Aborted,They Call It A Foetus. If Wanted, she Becomes Australia's Smallest Baby.
Daily Devotions: February 7 to February 13
Sermon: Romans series 7(b), The genuine believer discovered(2), Romans 2:29.
Daily Devotions January 31 to February 6
Obama’s universalism - Or, all religions teach truth, and all religions teach Barak Obama?
The embattled President of the United State, Barak Obama, was elected to office by a people who frankly don’t have much idea about what God requires of leaders and of those who elect them.
The Bible teaches that rulers or governments should submit to Jesus Christ in both their private and public capacities (Ps 2:12). This means governing according to the will of Christ which is only and infallibly found in the Bible. This is especially important because governments are required by God to protect and preserve the true religion (which means Reformed Presbyterianism; that is biblical Christianity) (Isaiah 49:23). Such protection implies repelling the intrusion of false religious principles which once absorbed can bring down civilisations.
However successive US leaders have been inclusivists and universalists who teach that all the major religions lead to God and are true.
It was a sober reminder this week to hear that the current US president starts his day with devotional or spiritual advice from a variety of religions, and not Christianity exclusively, even though he claims to be a Christian. ABCnews.go.com on January 30 reported that Obama begins his morning by reflecting either on Scripture or ‘quotes from other faiths’. This is how Obama put it: ‘My Faith and Neighborhood Initiatives director, Joshua DuBois, he has a devotional that he sends to me on my BlackBerry every day...That's how I start my morning. You know, he's got a passage, Scripture, in some cases quotes from other faiths to reflect on.’
In the same report we read that others give spiritual guidance to Obama: ‘Aides say some of that guidance comes from the president's faith advisory council of 25 religious and non-profit leaders who help the administration partner with faith-based and community groups in providing social services.’ These ‘faith-based’ and ‘community’ groups include Muslims and other religions beside Christianity.
In other words the leader of the United States, a nation under attack by Muslim terrorists around the world, receives spiritual advice from Muslims and other religious leaders about what is true and how to act righteously on a day to day basis, potentially influencing his every decision. The very religion which inspired the 9/11 terrorists and which threatens destruction to Israel and the West is a source of Obama’s spiritual preparation for the day. What an irony. Both Obama and Islamic terrorists around the world no doubt occasionally start their days on the same page of the Koran.
Who do you think is winning this war? It most certainly is not the United States when the motivation for Jihadism is the same spiritual fare imbibed by the US Commander in Chief of the forces supposedly seeking to overcome the application of Koranic teachings by the Koran’s most ardent followers like Osama Bin Laden.
Garnet Milne
Daily Devotions: January 24 to 30
The responsibility of Prince William, the Crown he represents and of the New Zealand government
An open letter and press release for all New Zealand MPs
Prince William, most likely Britain’s and New Zealand’s next monarch, is visiting New Zealand this week and his visit highlights the hypocrisy of the Queen and the Royal family. William a fresh faced young fellow has been smiling his way around New Zealand and getting blanket media coverage. When he arrived on the Lord’s Day he was soon sailing on Auckland harbour, throwing a rugby ball around and generally doing what the world does on the Lord’s Day. Why do I point this out?
The Prince is the future head of the Church of England and you would think as a good Anglican that he would attend one of their churches on the Sunday he arrived in New Zealand. In skipping church, the Prince is telling other Anglicans that you should play sport on the Lord’s Day and not bother about going to worship God. As a Sabbath breaker, the Prince is just echoing the hypocrisy of his father Prince Charles, who believes (contrary to Scripture) that all religions lead to God.
That William is someone who wilfully breaks the fourth commandment should not come as a surprise. After all the queen through her representative in New Zealand, the Governor General signs into law all the legislation the New Zealand government passes....MORE.
MS Word text of the sermon here.
Daily Devotions: January 17 to January 23
God's predestination and why man is not a robot: Meaning of life Bible study 17(1) from GHM on Vimeo.
Daily Devotions: January 10 to January 16
Daily Devotions: January 3 to January 9
Daily Devotions: December 27 to January 2, 2010
A Foreknowledge of Love, Meaning of life Bible study 16(1b) from GHM on Vimeo.
A Foreknowledge of Love, Meaning of life Bible study 16(1a) from GHM on Vimeo.
Sermon: Romans series (2), The Sovereignty of God and the maturity of the Church, Romans 1:8-15.
Daily Devotions: December 20 to December 26
Roy Blackwood and Michael Lefebvre, William Symington, Penman of the Scottish Covenanters (Grand Rapids: Reformation Heritage Books, 2009).
Blackwood and Lefebvre have done the church a great favour by introducing others to William Symington. This book of some 300 pages is not quite a biography, but gives many biographical details of Symington’s life and work.In an unusual preface, the work and life of one of the writers, Dr. Roy Blackwood, receives extended treatment before the authors turn to the life of Symington. Blackwood’s thesis on Symington is the basis for much of this book. William Symington (1795-1862) from a covenanting family was raised in the Scottish Reformed Presbyterian church. His older brother Dr. Andrew Symington, the other important Reformed Presbyterian theologian and minister from this era (both receive a mention in the Dictionary of Scottish Church History and Theology, p.808), was instrumental in his younger sibling entering the ministry. Both these covenanter ministers were part of a movement which could be traced back to the sixteenth-century Scottish Reformation and they shared the ethos, theology and ecclesiology of that great Reformer John Knox. While the Reformed Presbyterian church in Scotland did not become established as a church until the middle of the eighteenth century, it had existed as ‘societies’ from the days of the killing times between 1660 and 1688 when the bloody fanaticism of the profligate Charles II, and his successor erupted into open and deadly persecution of the godly covenanters. They were ‘covenanters’ because they believed that the Scottish National Covenant of 1638, and the 1643 Solemn League and Covenant of the three kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland had not been abrogated but remained as obligations for the posterity of the original covenanters.
Even after the bloodless ‘revolution’ of 1690, William of Orange did not restore the covenants to their proper place so that faithful men, women and families refused to join the covenant-rejecting Church of Scotland, but fellowshipped in the groups known as ‘societies’. Only in 1743 when a minister, John Macmillan, joined with them were they constituted as the Reformation presbytery. Because of the shortage of ministers many continued to meet as societies. William Symington was born and nurtured into this more settled situation. MORE
Sermon: Romans Series (1), Why we need to listen to the Apostle Paul, Romans 1:5-7.
Daily Devotions: Dec. 13 to Dec. 19th
The criminalisation of New Zealand parents who discipline children biblically. Will you obey God or man? from GHM on Vimeo.
The Doctrine of the Trinity and intellectual problems, Meaning of life Bible study 15(3) from GHM on Vimeo.
Daily Devotions: Dec. 6 to Dec. 12.
Sermon: Come into God's presence expectantly, Psalm 24.
The Tri-unity of God, The Meaning of Life Bible study 15(2) from GHM on Vimeo.
Sermon: The Satisfied Life, Phil 4:19.
Daily Devotions: Nov 29 to Dec 4
Press Release: Thursday, 26 November 2009
Dr. Garnet Milne,
www.covenantedreformation.com
The Evil Nature Of The Anti-Smacking Law Proved
An analysis of Peter Hughes’ reviewThe new law took away protection of a parent for disciplining his child. Formerly he was permitted by section 59 of the Crimes Act to discipline a child by using ‘reasonable force’. A review was recently tabled in Parliament by Peter Hughes, the CEO of the Ministry of Social Development, which is full of misinformation and misrepresentations of the truth.
The media have done a very poor of reporting this review. The New Zealand Herald, New Zealand’s leading newspaper, is typical. It simply parrots the findings of the review and fails to do any analysis in the report itself. It asks no searching questions and offer no criticisms. However, the report does indeed raise questions and invite criticism.Let us consider the report in light of the Herald’s sympathetic regurgitation of Hughes’ conclusions
The Herald reporter writes:
In the report, Ministry of Social Development head Peter Hughes said he could find no evidence that parents were being subject to "unnecessary state intervention" for occasionally lightly smacking their children
Notice that he can find no evidence. This is either a misrepresentation of the facts, or Hughes is blind to the evidence, for he gives the evidence himself in his report. He acknowledges that there have been 20 reports ‘of smacking passed to the police’ in the previous fifteen months. That represents 20 families who have had the indignity of the state’s agencies violate their home. Even one parent treated as a potential criminal because someone is aware he has smacked his children is bad enough. But here they admit 20 families have been so violated by unnecessary state intervention. The police went out and investigated these reports...MORE..
The legitimacy of the war in Afghanistan (1)
Resisting an unlawful governmentQuestion: Should we and other nations be fighting in the Afghanistan? Or should Christians resist their government’s involvement in the Afghanistan civil war?
There is a degree consensus in the world over what constitutes a just war. This consensus can be broken down into at least five elements.
- War can only be waged by a legitimate authority.
- The cause must be a just one.
- The end or intention must be a just one.
- The costs of war should not exceed the advantage gained by going to war.
- War should be a last resort.
Follow this LINK for the essay.
The exclusivity of the Triune God, The Meaning of Life Bible studies 15(1) from GHM on Vimeo.
Sermon: When you suffer the God of peace can be with you, Phil 4:4-13.
Daily Devotions: November 22 to November 28
Agnosticism and the existence of God, Meaning of life Bible study 14(1) from GHM on Vimeo.
Sermon: Pursuing Perfection, Phil 3:13-14
Daily Devotions: November 15 to November 21
The Supreme Judge Of Religious Controversies, Meaning of life Bible study 13(1) from GHM on Vimeo.
What a wonderful thing that God in His providence bans crucifixes through a European court
It is fascinating to see the reaction to the court’s decision to ban crucifixes from classrooms in Italy. Roman Catholics are up in arms over it. But from a Christian perspective it is a good thing. One of the great evils of Romanism is their blatant idolatry. Another is their dishonesty. Taking the second point first, consider the reaction of the Roman Catholic priests and Vatican to the ruling. Instead of arguing for the religious significance of the crucifix, which they hold dear, they are using another foil. The Italian bishops claimed that the crucifix is a cultural sign as well as a religious one and for this reason should not be banned. The Italian government also chipped in that the crucifix was a national symbol of culture, history, identity, tolerance and secularism. Of course, the crucifix is an idolatrous symbol and something forbidden in the Word of God. The Bible says that we are to make no images of anything, God included, ‘4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: 5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them:’(Ex. 20:4-5a).
A crucifix claims to be a depiction of Almighty God, the Second Person of the Trinity. How could any image of Christ depict His divine nature? And if you argue that the crucifix is only depicting His human nature, then you have admitted that you have torn apart the two natures of the person of Christ. Perhaps by God’s grace some at least in Italy and in other Romanist societies will go back to the Bible and learn there that the gospel is something quite different to what they have been told by their priests and pope. Who knows, this could be the presage of a new Reformation?
It is equally true that the authorities in the US are doing a good thing, when they ban nativity scenes and Christmas trees from public places. The Bible knows nothing of a festival of Christmas, and it is just as wrong to depict Christ as a little baby in a manger as it is to have Him hanging on a crucifix.
The wonderful truth is that Christ is no longer a little baby in a manger, nor is He a dead person hanging on a cross. He is the risen Lord and King who rules all things by His providence and still commands men everywhere to repent and believe. We can only be accepted by God if we embrace Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross as payment for our sin, and receive His righteousness, imputed to our account. This justification only comes about through faith. All these idolatrous attempts to appeal to the flesh by having play acting nativity scenes and waving crucifixes and pictures of Christ around the place, paradoxically will only lead men away from Christ. We should be urging the Italian Romanists to repent of their idolatry and turn to Christ in true faith, for He says still ‘Mt 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.’Garnet Milne
Sermon: Gaining Christ, Phil. 3:1-11.
Daily Devotions: Nov. 8 to Nov 14
Sermon: The Christian Life And Uncertainty, Phil. 2:19-30
Daily Devotions: Nov. 1 to Nov. 7
May we then paint Christ, for remembrance of his death?
No verily. For,
1. It is part of the worship here forbidden: because his body is a creature in Heaven; therefore not to be represented by an Image in the service of God.
2. An Image can onely represent the man-hood of Christ, and not his God-head, which is the chiefest part in him. Both which Natures being in him unseparable; it were dangerous by painting the one apart from the other, to give occasion of Arrianism, Apollinarisme or other heresies.
3. Sith [since] that in all the Scriptures, which speake so much of him, there is no shew of any portrayture or lineament of his body; it is plain that the wisdome of God would not have him painted.
4. Sith by preaching of the Gospell and administration of the Sacraments Christ is as lively painted out, as if he were crucified againe amongst us (Gal 3.1.) it were to no purpose to paint him to that end.
James Usher, A Body of Divinitie, London, 1647.
Obama’s Endorsement Of Islam May Be A Catalyst For Christians To Re-examine Their Acceptance Of The Political Status Quo
In his recent visit to Turkey, once the centre of the Ottoman empire and now an avowedly secular state, American President Obama stated: ‘We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country’. It might come as a surprise to most Americans that their country and the world generally are ‘better’ because of the influence of the ‘Islamic faith’. But they should not be surprised that an American political leader makes such statements. After all George Bush who claims to be an evangelical Christian called Islam a ‘great religion’ (Bush is actually a Universalist who believes that worshippers of other religions all worship the same God Christians do). Of course the main reason these men make these statements is firstly to try and win Muslims and Muslim nations to live in harmony with the US. But it is also true that such political leaders who laud Islam are at once denigrating biblical Christianity, because by applauding Islam they are at the same time denying both the teaching of the Bible and the historic attainments of the faithful church and society....MORE.
Ponder this: When the plane went down in the river in New York recently, passengers reported that everyone was praying. I wonder how many of those who called upon God now continue to exalt Him in obedience and worship? This is what Hosea says:
Hosea 11:7 'And my people are bent to backsliding from me: though they called them [or called] to the most High, none at all would exalt him'.
Sermon Series on Infant Baptism:
- 1 Cor. 7:14, Federal Holiness-The Status Of Our Children Before God (1) or Why We Are To Baptise Our Children
- 1 Cor. 7:14, Federal Holiness -The Status Of Our Children Before God (2) or Why We Are To Baptise Our Children
- 1 Cor. 7:14, Federal Holiness -The Status Of Our Children Before God (3) or Why We Are To Baptise Our Children
- Matt. 28:16-20: Text verse 19. Federal Holiness (4) - Infant Baptism In Spite Of No Specific Direct Command In Scripture.
- Federal Holiness 5. Infants And The Inward Grace Signified By The Outward Sign Of Baptism. Jeremiah 32:36-44. Acts 2:36 –42. Text verse 39A.
- John 3:1-8; Rom. 4:11; 1 Cor. 7:14, Federal Holiness -The Status Of Our Children Before God (6): The Grace Conveyed In Baptism
Lowest Common Denominator Democracy And The Inevitable Drift Towards Socialism
A dictionary definition says socialism is ‘A theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole’.
Some object to using the term socialism to describe modern democracies like Britain and New Zealand, because, it is alleged, the ownership of business is not vested in the community as a whole.
But socialism is an appropriate term to describe a system where a government exerts its power to redistribute taxation for welfare. In New Zealand’s case, successive governments have a long history of nationalising businesses. At present the national airline, the rail system and a local bank called Kiwi Bank, are owned by the government. Both the ‘conservative’ National Party and the more leftist Labour Party are comfortable with such arrangements. So in this sense New Zealand is a socialist country because the ‘community as a whole’ through its elected government controls at least some of the means of production and distribution, capital and land. More recently governments around the world including even the United States have bought into banks and other financial institutions essentially assuring direct government control. So in this sense, the US is also at least partly a socialist system.
Moreover, even when a government does not directly hold assets within the economy its taxation system and economic philosophy may be such that it controls the assets and earnings of private individuals. Capital gains tax, death tax (sometimes called estate tax or death duty), and progressive taxation which taxes the wealthy more heavily than those less wealthy, are all attempts to control the means of production and distribution so that the profits can be channelled directly to the government for redistribution. Inevitably this form of redistributive socialism leads inexorably to a ‘nanny-state’ cradle-to-grave welfare system as we have here in New Zealand. This is an authentic type of socialism, where wealth is purloined through punitive taxation for social welfare programmes. Personal responsibility goes out the window, and the indolent and immoral receive the wealth honestly earned by others.
US citizens should not be at all surprised that this type of socialism is becoming increasingly accepted in their own country. After all it is perfectly logical given the presuppositions of lowest common denominator democracy which is exalted by the present US Republican administration as the answer to the world’s problems. That President Bush was wrong to imply that imposing democracy on Iraq and Afghanistan would lead to peace and stability in that country shows a remarkable blind spot in the more conservative politicians in the US. Furthermore, because both Republicans and Democrats buy into the ultimate truth of lowest common denominator democracy as a saviour of society, the slide towards nanny-state socialism is inevitable.
The truth is that for New Zealand, the UK and the US the main political parties accept socialist premises. There is no question that a leader or a government might be elected to redistribute wealth in such democracies: it is just that one might redistribute wealth at a more aggressive pace than another. This is essentially the only difference between the ‘conservative’ and ‘liberal’ politicians and political parties. There was once a time when the New Zealand conservative National Party had a markedly different view than the liberal Labour party. It used to be that National promised lower tax, less government and less intrusion into the lives of New Zealand citizens. This has all changed so that there is little or no difference between the policies of both parties. What brought about this change?
National lost power and realised that only by adopting policies which promised benefits to the voters, especially financial benefits, would voters elect them to the treasury benches. Principle gave way to pragmatism. The electorate, dominated as it is by working low to medium income households, realised that they could have a party which redistributed wealth in their favour. Today all New Zealand political parties are socialist, promising lolly scrambles even in these hard times. Now New Zealand’s nationalised free health system is under enormous strain and at the point of collapse, crime is out of control and young New Zealanders are permanently leaving our shores in their droves.
Why is redistributive socialism an inevitable result of lowest common denominator democracy? The simple answer is that voters are dominated by self-interest and are for the most part practical atheists who have rejected God’s prescription for society. Criminals, immoral people, the illiterate and teenagers with absolutely no political understanding are all encouraged to vote.
However, a fair and truly prosperous society will only exist when God is honoured. This means that truly biblical democracy would only give the vote to men who are professing members in good standing in a biblical church. Such an electorate which honoured God would not just ensure a fair and just society, but also God’s blessing rather than His curse – a curse which presently rests upon all the secular humanist democracies of our day.
We live in a moral universe, and God has revealed His design for a faithful government (see Romans 13) – a government which honours the good and punishes the evil. Today in New Zealand, the good is punished, and evil is honoured. All the while God is excluded - not only from public discourse, but from any meaningful authority in politics. It is no accident that homosexuals and lesbians control many aspects of New Zealand society and government. Where evil has power, evil will flourish.
Lowest common denominator democracy, which replaces God’s will with the self-interest of practical atheists, will inevitably lead to socialism and big government. But it will also lead to moral decay and a weakening of economic and military power. Already in the US some politicians are calling for a 25% reduction in military spending, and a platform of appeasement with enemies who promote international terrorism and harbour terrorists.
Inevitably too, the tolerance of false religion and making legal allowance for the ethical systems of these anti-Christian creeds will continue to ensure the decline of the West. The UK’s acceptance of the permissibility of Islamic Sharia law in Britain will be exported to other spiritually bankrupt nations. These effects are without doubt signs of God’s judgement upon societies which once covenanted with Him to live as people under the one true God, obeying His precepts and striving to establish a godly society based upon biblical ethics.
These present political movements in the UK and in countries like New Zealand, Australia, Canada, the US and many other nations established by Britain should not be supported by the Lord’s people. Present political parties and politicians who are covenant rejecters should be witnessed to, not voted for. In the meantime we must pray that God will have mercy upon our societies and preserve us from the disastrous fruits of lowest common denominator democracy. The persecution and ethnic cleansing of Iraqi Christians is a metaphor for the folly and danger of making political and moral absolutes out of modern democratic notions.
Garnet Milne
Sermon Index: All the sermons on the index are now accessible
Had The US Followed Calvin's Advice On Usury, There Would Have Been No Financial Crisis. Download Calvin's Advice Here
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS FORTUNE OR CHANCE
John Calvin, Inst: 1:16:2
That this difference may better appear, we must know that God’s providence, as it is taught in Scripture, is opposed to fortune and fortuitous happenings. Now it has been commonly accepted in all ages, and almost all mortals hold the same opinion today, that all things come about through chance. What we ought to believe concerning providence is by this depraved opinion most certainly not only beclouded, but almost buried. Suppose a man falls among thieves, or wild beasts; is shipwrecked at sea by a sudden gale; is killed by a falling house or tree. Suppose another man wandering through the desert finds help in his straits; having been tossed by the waves, reaches harbor; miraculously escapes death by a finger’s breadth. Carnal reason ascribes all such happenings, whether prosperous or adverse, to fortune. But anyone who has been taught by Christ’s lips that all the hairs of his head are numbered [Matthew 10:30] will look farther afield for a cause, and will consider that all events are governed by God’s secret plan.
And concerning inanimate objects we ought to hold that, although each one has by nature been endowed with its own property, yet it does not exercise its own power except in so far as it is directed by God’s ever-present hand. cThese are, thus, nothing but instruments to which God continually imparts as much effectiveness as he wills, and according to his own purpose bends and turns them to either one action or another. No creature has a force more wondrous or glorious than that of the sun. For besides lighting the whole earth with its brightness, how great a thing is it that by its heat it nourishes and quickens all living things! That with its rays it breathes fruitfulness into the earth.! That it warms the seeds in the bosom of the earth, draws them forth with budding greenness, increases and strengthens them, nourishes them anew, until they rise up into stalks! That it feeds the plant with continual warmth, until it grows into flower, and from flower into fruit! That then, also, with baking heat it brings the fruit to maturity! That in like manner trees and vines warmed by the sun first put forth buds and leaves, then put forth a flower, and from the flower produce fruit! Yet the Lord, to claim the whole credit for all these things, willed that, before he created the sun, light should come to be and earth be filled with all manner of herbs and fruits [Genesis 1:3, 11, 14]. Therefore a godly man will not make the sun either the principal or the necessary cause of these things which existed before the creation of the sun, but merely the instrument that God uses because he so wills; for with no more difficulty he might abandon it, and act through himself.
Then when we read that at Joshua’s prayers the sun stood still in one degree for two days [Joshua 10:13], and that its shadow went back ten degrees for the sake of King Hezekiah [2 Kings 20:11 or Isaiah 38:8], God has witnessed by those few miracles that the sun does not daily rise and set by a blind instinct of nature but that he himself, to renew our remembrance of his fatherly favor toward us, governs its course. Nothing is more natural than for spring to follow winter; summer, spring; and fall, summer — each in turn. Yet in this series one sees such great and uneven diversity that it readily appears each year, month, and day is governed by a new, a special, providence of God.
Prominent Christian Theologian Dr. James Packer Speaks Out on Homosexuality
By Thaddeus M. Baklinski
VANCOUVER, July 21, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Dr. James Innell Packer, a noted Canadian theologian, author and a Board of Governors Professor of Theology at Regent College in Vancouver, as well as an executive editor of Christianity Today, recently addressed the contentious problem of homosexuality and same-sex unions in the Anglican church.
The Anglican Church has come to a cross-roads because of the issue of same-sex "marriage," with a massive split in the Global Communion looking increasingly inevitable. Dr. Packer opened his remarks with a statement explaining why this issue is of such great importance in the Anglican Church today. "In brief," he said, "because it involves the denial of something that's integral to the Christian Gospel."That is, whereas the Bible says that same-sex unions are off limits as far as God is concerned, and that the Gospel requires any who have been involved in them to repent of that involvement and to abandon it, this point of view against which we are standing, treats gay unions...as a form of holiness, and encourages, affirms and blesses them, rather than saying, as we believe the Gospel requires us to say, that this is the wrong track.""You are required to abandon it and we, in the Christian fellowship, will help you to…walk chaste, not yield to your besetting temptations," he continued. "And that is God's way for you. We are obliged by the Gospel to say that because the apostle Paul, proclaiming the Gospel to the Corinthians, says explicitly that they mustn't be deceived…and those living in homosexual relationships will not inherit the Kingdom of God.""In other words, they don't qualify for Christ's salvation in terms of the Gospel that God has revealed."
Dr. Packer asserted that the blessing of same-sex unions is a direct contradiction of Scripture and there can be no compromise on the issue. "The Scripture teaching that is being denied is an element of the Gospel itself, that is God's message about how we sinners can be saved. If you refuse to repent, at some point where the Gospel requires you to repent, well, you are not walking according to the Gospel, and what Paul says is that your soul is in danger.""Now I don't want to believe that, but I dare not disbelieve it - it's apostolic teaching, it's the word of God."
The misinterpretation of Scripture to suit the homosexual position is in fact a direct attack on God's "straight forward" use of the language in the Bible, he said, which is directed toward giving us an understanding of salvation. Dr. Packer explained that "the folk who are affirming gay sex as a form of holiness are understanding the Bible in a very different way from that in which the rest of us think that it asks to be understood."
"God uses language to tell us things, and the Bible is the language that he's used. The Bible is personal communication from the Creator to us creatures, and in personal communication you speak and write to be understood. You don't communicate in code; you don't say one thing in a way which is intended to be understood as meaning its opposite."
"God is, we believe, straight forward; the Bible, in that sense, is straight forward, and Paul in 1st Corinthians is straight forward.""The heart of the Christian message," Dr. Packer concludes, "is the transformation of lifestyle," which is enabled by the grace of God.
Dr. Packer is widely regarded as one of the most important Protestant theologians today. He has stated that the Anglican Church of Canada has been "poisoned" by a liberal theology that "knows nothing of a God who uses [the Bible] to tell us things and knows nothing of sin in the heart and in the head." He said the Church is being ruined by its attempts to "play catch-up with the culture" by adopting whatever "is the in-thing."
Now That British Politicians Have Approved The Creation Of Chimeras, or a Frankenstein, We must Continue To Ask -
Is the Creation of Human/Animal Hybrids Legitimate or Ethical Science?
Garnet Milne
The British Parliament has just decided that it will permit the creation of a hybrid embryo either by mixing animal sperm with human eggs or human sperm with animal eggs. They have already approved a process where other human genetic material is injected into animal eggs to make hybrid cells, with the proviso that the living material must be destroyed at 14 days. They were created by injecting DNA from human skin cells into eggs taken from cows which had almost all their genetic material removed. Moreover, already scientists in different countries have fused rabbit and human cells, made human blood flow through pigs and are planning to grow human brains in mice. British scientists want to use the hybridizing techniques so that they can produce embryonic stem cells in order to discover causes and cures of diseases such as motor neurone disease, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's.
How are we as Christians to evaluate these processes and technologies? Does the manufacture of animal/human hybrids or living hybrid cells or embryos offend against the Law of God?...MORE.top.
Obama seeks to move the US into a post-Christian nightmare where the values of atheists and idolaters hold sway: Or Obama’s reasons for keeping Christian ethics out of the public square
Garnet Milne PhD
The Muslim terrorists who drove airliners into the twin towers in New York managed to kill several thousand, maim many others and create fear among the general population in the US. Obviously this audacious terrorist act of evil was devastating. Nonetheless, the terrorists who planned and executed this mayhem could have achieved a far greater ‘victory’ for their cause had they done something more cerebral and more profound. Had they sought to argue for an Islamic morality in a peaceful manner, they might have conceivably been successful in changing the thinking of many Americans about ultimate issues such as the identity of God and the source of morality - they could have exceeded their wildest dreams and begun to take over a nation for their false god Allah.
While military might has often been used to defeat an ideological enemy, true victory only occurs when a population agrees with its (former) enemies because there has been a fundamental shift in the moral and philosophical mindset. You have to win hearts and minds as well as real estate.
9/11 achieved the opposite for the terrorists. They only managed to mobilise a good part of the free world against their cause, making their safe house of Afghanistan no longer safe. But what 9/11 could never achieve may be accomplished by the fresh-faced black senator Barack Hussein Obama.
Although many Americans do not realise it, Obama and his closest advisors are intent on shifting the underlying mindset or ethos of the US majority to a radically different ideology of secularism sanitised by vaguely religious rhetoric. And he plans to expunge Christian and biblical discourse from the public square unless it happens to coincide with the morality of non-Christian idolaters and atheists. Whatever his speech may appear to offer Christians with one hand, he takes it away with another.
Obama exposes his true motives in a speech he gave to the Renewal Conference on Wednesday, June 28, 2006, where he revealed his true intentions for the US, and if it was in his power, for the rest of the world. For this reason his election to the office of president must be opposed by every legal device possible. Well, what did he say at this conference in a speech ostensibly about the relationship between politics and religion – specifically American politics and Christianity?
In this speech Obama deliberately brings confusion to the idea that God has spoken concerning both public and private morality....MORE...top. Or follow this link for a MS Word copy.
How The Westminster Assembly Taught In Their Confession Of Faith That Only The Biblical Psalms Could Be Sung In Worship.
Essay 2 – Exclusive Psalmody, The Default Practice And The Position Of The Early English Puritans
The recovery of congregational singing only occurred at the time of the sixteenth-century Reformation, even though there were those, such as the Swiss Reformer Zwingli, who did not agree with sung praise in worship. And it was only after Calvin arrived, that congregational singing was included as part of public worship in Geneva on the Lord’s Day. Calvin had also accepted a call to serve a French congregation in Strasbourg (or Strassburg) in 1538. A liturgy ascribed to Calvin appeared first in 1540 which including the singing of the Ten Commandments, the Apostles’ Creed and the Song of Simeon. Calvin returned to Geneva in 1541 where he introduced the Strasbourg liturgy for the end of a communion service but without reference to the Song of Simeon.1 We can say that there was a movement towards exclusive psalmody, but not quite arriving there. However, in order to understand developments in England and Scotland we cannot ignore two streams of thinking within the Protestant communities of Marian exiles in the sixteenth century.
Two Streams
The English/Scottish exile communities at Strasbourg and Geneva (although the exiles at Wessel and other centres made a contribution) were to be the greatest influence for later English and Scottish congregational singing. The British practise of congregational singing, therefore, cannot be understood without some insight into a dispute which occurred within an English exile congregation in Frankfurt. The Frankfurt congregation was established in 1554 at the time of Queen Mary, the persecuting Roman Catholic queen who had taken over the throne of England following the death of Edward VI in 1553. Her desire was to return back to the religious status quo at the beginning of Henry VIII’s reign and place England once more under the authority of the pope....MORE...top
1. Robin A. Leaver, ‘Goostly psalms and spirituall songes’, English and Dutch Metrical Psalms from Coverdale to Utenhove, 1535-1566 (London: Clarendon Press, 1991), 46-47.
How The Westminster Assembly Taught In Their Confession Of Faith That Only The Biblical Psalms Could Be Sung In Worship.
Essay 1 - An Introduction To The Debate
It would probably come as a shock to many Presbyterian elders and ministers to hear that their subscription to the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) required them to uphold the practice of exclusive psalmody. WCF 21:5 lists one element of public worship as the ‘singing of Psalms with grace in the heart’.
A complete study has never been attempted of the Westminster Standards and the views of their authors over the identity of ‘Psalms’ these standards instruct us are to be sung in worship. While many contemporary Presbyterian or Reformed churches have rejected the teaching of the Westminster Standards at various points, making such precise questions irrelevant in their eyes, those remaining churches which have wanted to maintain the view that they really are the heirs of the English Presbyterian Puritans, or the Scottish Presbyterians have not uncommonly sanitised the WCF and other Reformed standards to ease their consciences over subscription. Removing references to the pope as antichrist is one example, but many modern Presbyterians do not only differ with the Westminster eschatology. They have also modified their worship practices in a manner which would leave them unrecognisable to the Reformed orthodox of a more consistent age.
When this modification has taken place in subscriptionist churches, such denominations have not necessarily seen fit to add a declaratory act to their subscription standards, or change the WCF to fit their beliefs. Instead, they have argued that the WCF or other subordinate standards allow more than one interpretation. Alternatively they might contend that where the WCF is silent on a matter, other practices are not ipso facto excluded. For example, because Christmas and Easter are not specifically mentioned in the WCF, some would argue that it is therefore lawful to celebrate those feast days. Another example might be that since musical instruments are not discussed, it is not, therefore, contrary to the Confession of Faith to use such instruments in public worship. Thus it is not considered inconsistent to claim a strict subscription to the Westminster Standards while observing feast days, using musical instruments, performing dance and drama, or singing uninspired hymns in public worship. This new attitude towards subscription and the Westminster Standards, however, must be challenged, because it is a departure from the attainments of the Second Reformation and a dishonest interpretation of the intentions of the Westminster divines who composed these documents of uniformity – a uniformity which they had hoped would usher in a more pure Reformation even beyond the shores of the British Isles.
This series of essays will make the case from primary and secondary sources: Why Full Subscription To The Westminster Confession Requires A Commitment To Exclusive Psalmody: Or How The Westminster Assembly Taught In Their Confession Of Faith That Only The Biblical Psalms Could Be Sung In Worship....MORE...top.
(If you wish to be notified as each essay becomes available please send me a note with your email address included here.)
Garnet Milne
Keeping Up Appearances – Piercing And Tattoos
We live in a society, where many former taboos have become acceptable. It has long been chic to be a social iconoclast. It is uncool to be decent and cool to be indecent. What was once evil is now good (Isaiah 5:20).
When it comes to specifics like appearance, standards and values have indeed changed. Growing up in the fifties and sixties, you will recall that male students were expelled from school if they failed to cut their hair to the required length. How times have changed, although hair length has always been the subject of fluctuation. But times have changed in church life as well. Few young men wear a tie these days, and often instead wear casual clothing, which once would not have been considered acceptable in church.
I'm sure that there are some reading this who lament this change, as indeed I do. I think, however, that we can agree that it is very unlikely that most of the younger generation will begin to wear suits and ties again. Some people don't even own one. And it is also true that ‘best clothes’ for the younger generation are now something other than a pin-striped suit. For some, I know, if a suit is required as part of one's employment, it is seen by them as a uniform, say like that of a policeman or a bus driver. If you remember back to the fifties and early sixties families would go uptown on Friday night and dad would wear his suit and probably a hat as well. There were also recognisable occasions when you donned your suit. You probably only had one and it was definitely your best clothing. Today it is so different.
Should there be standards of appearance?
But this raises the question, are there to be any standards concerning appearance for the Christian? I want to suggest that not only are there such standards, but that our standards are slipping. There are two areas of appearance that we will briefly look at – tattoos and body piercing.... MORE...top.
The Westminster Confession of Faith and the Cessation of Special Revelation - The
Majority Puritan Viewpoint on Whether Extra-biblical Prophecy is Still Possible.
By Garnet Howard Milne (Published by Paternoster in Bletchley, Milton Keynes UK, 2007)When the seventeenth-century English Puritan-dominated parliament became embroiled in a conflict with Charles I, the members of the Long Parliament sought military assistance from the Scots. The Scots, however, also desired to see a united Reformation of church and society and proposed a covenant to institute a greater religious uniformity in the three kingdoms. The English parliament established the Westminster Assembly to prepare the documents for that uniformity. One of those documents, the Westminster Confession of Faith, addressed the major theological disputes of the day; one of which centred on whether God still revealed His will outside of the Bible. The book concludes that the Westminster divines believed that God still directed people in all of life, though revelation which came immediately from God had ceased now that the church had the completed Scriptures.
In the opening chapter of the Confession, the divines of Westminster included a clause which implied that there would no longer be any special immediate revelation from God. Means by which God had once communicated the divine will, such as dreams, visions, and the miraculous gifts of the Spirit, were said to be no longer available. However, many of the authors of the WCF accepted that 'prophecy' continued in their time, and a number of them apparently believed that disclosure of God's will through dreams, visions, and angelic communication remained possible. How is the 'cessationist' clause of WCF l:l to be read in the light of these claims? This book reconciles this paradox in a detailed study of the writings of the authors of the Westminster Confession of Faith.
What Others Think
'Garnet Milne presents us with a much-needed study... He builds his case by presenting judicious and thorough evidence from a large number of both primary and secondary sources. It is a fascinating and groundbreaking book ...and clarifies a remarkable amount of profound, theological detail.'
Joel R. Beeke, from the Foreword - President and Professor of Systematic Theology, Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA'Connecting the past to the present is always a difficult but necessary task for the responsible Christian theologian. Dr Milne's work is a good example of how modern questions can be sensitively engaged in a manner which gives due respect to the great formulations of the past without either imposing Procrustean criteria on such historic discussions or simply historicising such to the point of irrelevance.'
Carl R. Trueman, Professor of Church History and Historical Theology, Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia, USA'Scholars in puritan studies are increasingly alert to the variety of the movement's theology and spirituality. Garnet Milne's carefully-argued conclusions will provide a major resource for the reassessment of the most critical of puritan doctrines - the sufficiency of Scripture.'
Crawford Gribben, Long Room Hub Senior Lecturer in Early Modern Print Studies, Trinity College, DublinFor different purchase options email me at the contact box in the left hand nav bar....top
If Aborted,They Call It A Foetus. If Wanted, It Becomes Australia's Smallest Baby.
Women receive abortions in New Zealand into the third trimester. Little babies have to be killed in a brutal and callous manner. But the abortionist and the present government and the vast majority of our other politicians and media claim that this 'foetus' even into the third trimester is not a human being. However, when a baby in its second trimester with 16 weeks before full term is born alive as this little baby was, it is graphic evidence that a baby is a human being. This little cutey can fit into her mother's hand. Born in January weighing 319 grams Elora De Bondi defied the pessimism of the doctors and nurses and lived to prove that not only is an unborn child of 24 weeks a real human being, but is also perfectly formed and ready for life...MORE..top.
