A City in a City

Yesterday at Jubilee we were privileged to have Mark Driscoll here with us. This is the first time he remembers preaching in another church in many years. You can dowload the sermon or listen to it right here:


Incidentally, Tim Chester has shared his notes from one of the sessions of the Dwell Conference and plans to share from one of the others. I will post notes and video from the rest of the sessions from this Acts 29 day conference over the next few days. I also have video interviews to share from a number of people, including Mark Driscoll.

Mark took us to Jeremiah 29. Cities are marked by two things—density and diversity. London seems to be the most dense and diverse city he has ever seen. Originally Christianity was a city-based urban movement, although now it tends to be rural. Culture flows like a river downstream. By 300 A.D. around 50 per cent of people living in cities were Christian, while 90 per cent of those living in rural areas were not. Today that tendency is reversed and fewer Christians live in the cities than in rural areas. By 2030, 60 per cent of all people will live in cities.

The city of Babylon has a lot in common with Greater London. The Babylonians colonized many nations, a bit like the English did. Babylon was founded by Nimrod.

The local church is a small city living within the city living according to the values of God. In the kingdom of God there is racial harmony so it should be so in the Church. We should see repentance from sin and love for God. Our church needs to grow to become a city. With Jesus there is a better way of life. We do sex, marriage, love, parenting differently. We invite them to meet Jesus and have him change their life.


Jeremiah 29:4 “I have sent …” We are called of God to be a missionary wherever we are. Sent to the London area. We can reach the nations of the earth if we reach London. It’s like a hub or a crossroads. This is one of the most important cities, or probably the most important city in the world. Babylon was like that in previous days. God determines the times and places in which we live. If this city of London meets Jesus, the entire world will hear about him.

Verse 5 — Tells them to build houses, plant gardens, etc. Plan on being there for awhile. We shouldn't merely use the city, but invest in it. God will call some of us to move on, but many of us need to strongly consider staying here and giving our lives to London, investing our lives here for the good of the city. The first thing that a missionary needs to do is stay. Driscoll has given his life with his wife for one city, Seattle. Unless God shows up he will be staying there. Don't make decisions on economic ease, but on the kingdom.

Verse 6 — Take wives (well, the men, only!) and make babies. Multiply there and do not decrease. We must honor family, gender, sexuality, and parenting. If you are single, then aspire to be married. Men today shirk responsibility. We have to get the young men if we want to change the city. Single guys in their 20’s tend to shun masculinity, maturity, and responsibility. They are ruining the city—they take advantage of women, commit crimes, wives and girlfriends have to look after them, they murder their own kids by encouraging abortion. Young men must learn to be men—find their pants, get a job, marry a woman, and stay out of trouble. Men are like trucks, the more weight you can put on them, the straighter they drive, i.e. men who are lazy get distracted and tend to sin, load them with things to do and they will be better.

Men have to be independent and provide for their family. Anyone who doesn't provide for the needs of his family is worse than an unbeliever. His ten-year old daughter said of a girl kissing two different boys, “She doesn't have a good father.” In the city there is rape and abuse going on, as well as treating each other with contempt. We live differently here and we want the outsiders to have a better way of life and future.

We need to know and love the city. At the moment Muslims are moving into the city and having lots of children knowing that in a few generations they could control the culture. Do what is best for those who live in the city. Think about ways to do good for the whole city. If the schools are terrible, let the Christians go in and volunteer. Pray for the city, it moves the hands of God and it changes the hearts of men and women. God will change our hearts so that we will work to bring change to the city. Let people around notice that the church loves the city.

Verse 8 — Do not listen to false teachers. Satan will try and teach us false things so that we will do evil in the city. We need to know the truth well and defend it.

The gospel is that we are all sinners. We don't do what we are supposed to do, and we do do what we are not supposed to do. There is a broken relationship with God. It was only through God himself becoming a man and a missionary into human history that we can be reconciled to God. He went to the cross and substituted himself for us and for our sins. 2 Corinthians 5:21 — God made him sin so we might become righteous. The great exchange. Death to him, life to us. Separation to him, relationship to us. Condemnation to him, salvation to us. He is resurrected and ascended to heaven to build his city on earth. The storyline of the Bible is from the Garden of Eden to the city of the New Jerusalem coming from heaven. We will live together in a city. He will wipe tears from our eyes. Our hope, salvation, life, eternity, joy, is all in Jesus. There are two primary enemies of the gospel—idolatry and religion. Jeremiah says to watch out for false teaching. The temptation to idolatry would have come from the Babylonians, while the temptation to being religious would have come from the Jews.


Idolatry is THE sin according to Martin Luther. Sin is turning our worship from God to something else. The opposite of Christianity is not atheism, it is idolatry. We must keep ourselves from idols. If we don't worship idols, we won’t sin. The first of the commandments tell us that there is only one God and we must worship him alone; the rest are the implications. So if we worship God and not our image, we won’t lie. If we worship him alone, we won't covet. We put something in the prime place of glory and we then worship it by making sacrifices of time, etc. IF it is Jesus, then we will enjoy what God gives. But, if someone or something else is in that position, then it is idolatry. Romans 1 says people changed from worshiping God to worshiping created things.

Who or what do you worship? Your spouse? Your health? Your comfort? Your children? These are all good gifts but they are not GOD. Don’t worship them instead of God. If our spouse doesn’t meet all of our needs, then we get disappointed. If you expect comfort and peace and sinless relational harmony from your spouse, then you will get angry because that is something you can only get from God.

Terry began by recommending the outstanding biography of John Newton written by Jonathan Aitkin. I have listened to the CD version and enjoyed it immensely. I join Terry in commending it strongly to you. Terry also recommended two books by Christopher Wright on being missional.

Mark Driscoll began by returning to the marks of a spirit-filled church. He again explained to us that he believes we have been faithful in the mission. He feels, however, that perhaps we could see more fruitfulness. He is convinced that we can grow more quickly and be more effective at reaching people for Christ.

More posts from this conference can be found on my TOAM08 label page. You can download the mp3 of Mark's talk or listen to it right here:


As he began, I was very impressed that, as he prayed, he asked the Holy Spirit to guard his words, his attitude, and his tone.

Here, then, is Driscoll’s eight-point definition of the Church. Some of these constitute the being, and others the well-being of the Church.

1. Regenerated Church Membership

Qualified Church Leadership

This is, he believes, THE strength of Newfrontiers based on what he has seen. In particular, Driscoll said it is very important to hold the line on male eldership. To oppose this position is very popular among those who are not successful. You have to approach the Scriptures differently to come to the opposite position. One of the reasons Newfrontiers is strong, argues Driscoll, is because of our commitment to male elders. If we ever compromise on that issue, we will find our blessing will diminish. Continue to hold that line. To change it changes everything—how families are organized, etc. Church life sets the pattern for home life. We need pastor-dads who are shepherds to their own flock at home. Keep holding that line!!

Gathering Regularly for Preaching and Worship.

He feels he is learning a lot from us on worship. (See also what he said on his blog about Newfrontiers.)

Rightly Administered Sacraments

Unity and Affection, which is evidence of the Holy Spirit

Discipline for Holiness

Church discipline is critical. Church discipline is correction, not retribution, just the same as in the family. Not to destroy someone, but to persuade them not to continue in sin. Don't preach one thing and fail to enforce it.

Obey the Great Commandment to Love—Church and Neighbor

Obey the Great Commission to Evangelize and Make Disciples

If definitions 1 through 7 are not present, you cannot do mission because unity isn't there. Prayer and worship and fellowship can be so much loved that we somehow just trust that the work will get done. Since we also believe God is sovereign, we tend to let him figure it out. Because we are charismatics, we tend to think the Spirit will figure it out. Truth is, we need a plan, and a more intentional one. We will see some growth without an intentional plan because we’re healthy, but if we are intentional about it we will grow faster.

God will be glorified by making disciples. Don't have a branch of church called the “Mission Department.” We have to have ALL branches of our churches being missional. So kids work is about discipleship of kids, etc. We want our children to be on a mission with us, too.

There was a missionary in India, and he discovered upon his return that London had become just as pagan as India was. He realized that the churches didn't think they needed to be missional themselves. If you are a Christian, you tend to become assimilated into the subculture of the church. Take all our missional thinking and be missionaries in the West.

Some people think of church as a bomb-shelter. You can identify this by lots of “we and them” language. Here you will find lots of preaching against the culture, not engagement with it. You will find people who share your values and protect your kids. There is no attempt to evangelize. This is classic fundamentalism.

Other people see church as a mirror. This is classic liberalism. Gender issues is a classic current example. If the culture is for an issue, the church then compromises and mirrors what is in the culture. No attempt is made to redeem the culture. They may be more aware, but in the end they are less helpful.

Some see church as a parasite. They enter the culture to take out of it for themselves. There is no real giving. They want to benefit from what happens, but not do for them. Ask non-Christians what they think of the church. Their answer will be—no serving the poor, no helping, no doing good, and taking, not contributing.

Some see church as a city within a city—a city on a hill. The Church is the city of God within the city of the world. Here the Church loves Jesus, believes the Bible, practices grace, and the power of God is made known. The people live differently within the culture. They are not antagonistic or negative, but live an alternative life style. They invite others to join in this life style.

Driscoll then began to identify the twelve aspects of a missional church.

First, a missional church sees the church as a missional outpost—with a view for growth. We have a weakness in Newfrontiers, in Driscoll's view, which is a fear of multiple services. More options means more people can be reached. Multiple services should become a goal. People can tend to define the church by the number of people in a room at one time. But it should be defined by the number of people on a mission, even if they are never in a room together. Can have multiple campuses. Can have one church in more than one location as a second form of church planting. A missional church does church plant. We should set aside money specifically for church planting. At least 10 per cent of church funds at Acts 29 churches go to church planting.

Second, a missional church sees every Christian as a missionary. Cares for those with whom they come in contact. Pays attention to getting out and reaching out. Needs their people to be good theologians and good apologists. Sets things up so people naturally bring their non-Christian friends to church. Shares the gospel every single Sunday. If you think that they are all Christians, they are not! If, for example, you want men, preach to men, even if there are none there because their wives will get them to come. It can’t be a goofy presentation of the gospel, it must be a relevant one. Every week train them to recognize how everything relates to Jesus, e.g. marriage, parenting, etc. Mark shared an example of a couple in the church who couldn't understand why they shouldn't sleep together outside of marriage. He told them, “You are preaching a false gospel.” He asked them if their friends knew that they were Christians and were doing this. If so, he explained, they were saying the wrong thing with their lives. Jesus has a bride, not a girlfriend.

If people know that there will be preaching about Jesus and the gospel every week, they will bring their friends. It won’t matter what week they come. Mars Hill has a group that discusses what he has preached. Those who come don't have to be Christians and can ask questions. Most people will allow you to pray for them, even if they are atheists. As soon as you get cancer, your become an agnostic. “Would you mind if I pray for you right now?”

Bring converts on stage. Let them tell their story. Tell them to share their stories before you baptize them. Stories drive us to being missional. A church is cursed when there are no converts or babies.

Daniel and his contemporaries weren’t just in Babylon to be punished, but to be a missionary to share the knowledge of God to all those kings. Driscoll again said that in watching Newfrontiers, it was his observation that we are devoted to the Lord. But we must be more of a witness to those around us.

Third, a missional church is keenly aware of the local culture. (Acts 17—He SAW that the city was full of idols.) We must be greatly troubled. We are too submerged in our Christian subculture. We need to ask ourselves, “What is going on in the world? What is popular? Which shows are women watching? Which are men watching?” He watches teenage girl shows because he wants to know what they are thinking! He wants to get ahead of his daughter. Fast-forward them. Ultimate fighting is the fastest growing sport in the USA, for example. TV shows the different gods, whether sports, fame, sex, money, etc. Look for the idols. Watch it missiologically. Don't be naïve. Stop the movie and discuss it with them. Where is the Dad? Dad is an idiot, but the dog is smart. What are they trying to tell us? That if you can’t trust Dad, you should do it yourself. TV shows are sermons. Watch Extreme Makeover. Ask yourself, “What is missing? Why does this family need this house?” None of the families have a Dad! Where’s the Dad? Use the examples that are out there. Work illustrations into the preaching. They know who Posh Spice is, or whoever! I pay attention to your world; now let me tell you about the culture of the Bible. Listen to radio/drive time TV. Know what people are talking about. See who are the teams and tribes. Find your kids My Space page! Find the teens in your church. Facebook and My Space are like a Catholic confessional. Pay attention to the students lives in the church. What are your people reading in blogs?

Magazines have on their cover someone's definition of heaven. Car heaven, six-pack heaven, stereo heaven, photography heaven, etc. Visions of heaven. If you buy the magazine can be delivered from your hell and give you your heaven. Do these things and you will get there. It’s evangelism. How does this work with the Bible? Is that view of heaven they are offering false? Why? What is the underlying need the magazine is trying to address?

People are devoted religiously to hobbies, sports, etc. Go to the mall before the kids do! If shopkeepers are working in the middle of the afternoon they are bored. See what they are selling and buying. Ask questions of the bored store workers. He walked into a teenage girls’ clothing store. He said, “Do you have anything in my size?” He told her the truth, that he is a pastor always looking to learn, who has a daughter who is almost a teenager. “Who shops here? What do they buy?” He walked out understanding more of why girls feel pressured to look a certain way.

Grocery store. Go with the intent of looking at everything. What’s there? What does it tell you? Big organic section means there are more green people. They believe in justification by recycling so you need to have recycling bins at church! Good to learn.

First place—where do they live? Second place—where do they work? Third place—where do they play? Go to where they play. Where they would live if they could afford it! Where do they really want to be?

Do you have a total routine? Repent and stop doing it. Leave early and use it to look around. There are multiple ways to do church work—see what is happening in your neighborhood. His wife asks, “Where are we going?” He says, “Don't worry, we will get there. I’m not lost I am missiological. Interesting! There's new businesses going in here, young families moving in. Pull over and start asking people questions.

This is not British, but that is why the UK is so non-Christian.

Building works asked the foreman, “What’s going on?” Oh, couples leaving, so we’re tearing down some homes and building condos. That’s more people. Start a new community group there and welcome them into the neighborhood. What is happening?

Speak to parents. What is happening to the kids? Talk to the people who talk to the people. Ask the cashier questions. Who comes in here? Who’s the weirdest person who ever comes in here? Talk to the people in service economy. They see hundreds of thousands of people all week. They see the real deal!

What’s going on lately at the bank? Was told people are freaking out. Checks bouncing. Well, maybe we should do seminars on money then! Always look for new opportunities.

Start an evening service for new people. They had five services where he preached live, but that felt like being hit by a truck. So they went down to four services, which now feels like being hit by a car! Services at 8:30 at night are packed and people even show up late! People who are out last night won’t get up for a 9 a.m. service. He pastors people publicly by text message, i.e. asks questions anonymously. Someone once asked, “I have been raped, can I get an abortion?”

Consider everybody in your church. It’s okay to be family friendly, have a great kids program, help your marriage. But if you’re not careful, singles may get the impression that you don't want them, don't need them, don't like them. Now there are more unmarried than married people! These days being married to a woman and having children is countercultural. If someone who is the product of an abused home walks in, etc., it’s not about trying to maintain a good family.

When preaching through the book of Ruth, Mars Hill showed great growth at that time. They had to turn 300 people away from one of their services! Is your church welcoming, friendly, a hospital to those people? Or is it all married couples and families?

Missional church contends and contextualizes. Jude says “Contend for the faith.” What are we going to fight over? What’s in the closed hand? You guys love the Bible, Jesus, the cross, the resurrection, the ministry of the Holy Spirit, the poor, the lost, church planting. Keep that! Fight for them! But also contextualize. By ALL MEANS save as MANY people as possible. Do it for the sake of the gospel. Open the door to your church as broadly as you can without compromising. Use technology, etc.

We are NOT trying to make Christianity relevant, but rather are showing that it IS ALREADY relevant.

If a teenage girl tells you she lost her virginity to her father, the gospel IS relevant to her, but she needs to be shown HOW it is. So said I need to speak to you about expiation. “I’ve no idea about what that means!” Took some time, showed her that what was done to her the Bible calls a sin, a horrific evil. Fathers are privileged to carry the name father and carry it with nobility and honor. What has happened to you is shocking. What did you do afterwards? Took a shower because I felt dirty. You were defiled. The Bible says there is sin that is done by us and against us. And sin does make us dirty. “I will always feel dirty.” Jesus is God. He came to earth, was abused and beaten and tormented and shamed. He was humiliated and tortured. He can sympathize with you. God was sinned against. Jesus went to the cross and they killed him. But he forgives our sin AND cleanses us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1). She said, “I feel totally ashamed.” Jesus endured the cross and scorned its shame. Jesus died not only to forgive you, but to cleanse you from the sins against you. That shower was an effort for you to cleanse yourself, but it can’t cleanse your soul, your identity, your femininity. The gospel was relevant to her! She responded immediately. Driscoll said to her, “Choose to see yourself as Jesus does. You need Jesus so you can be cleansed, pure, and wear white!”

We don't MAKE Jesus relevant; we show how he already IS relevant.

Here are some notes from the sermon I preached this past Sunday at Jubilee Church in Enfield Cineworld. You can download the audio or listen to it online in the following player:



I began by sharing the story of a mother who was diagnosed with terminal cancer and refused the abortion she was offered in order to give the gift of life to her daughter.

She told her husband, "If I am going to die, my baby is going to live."

Said her husband after she had died, "She knew all too well she didn't have long to live. So she put little Liam's life before her own."

Full story in the Telegraph.

The sermon is based on Philippians 2. The notes are very much just an outline, but they are nearly identical to the notes from which I preached. I have been experimenting with preaching from shorter notes, so I hope they will still at least make some sense to you. If not, you will just have to listen to the message itself.

We will come later in the book to the ultimate goal for living—to know Jesus. But one key way we express our love for God is by loving each other and the world. Jesus said in John 13:35: "By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

It is this love for each other that I am going to call "living for the good of others."

What is our motivation to live for the good of others?

"Because of" (verses 1-2) NOT “if” — but “assuming there is”

• Encouragement in Christ (paraklesis) ;
• Comfort from love (paramythion) ;
• Participation in the Spirit (koinonia);
• Affection (splanchon – spleen - bowels!) ;
• Sympathy.

Also, we do this to complete our leader's joy!

What does living for others look like? (verses 2-5 and others)

• The same mind (agreement).
  
• The same love (warmth, compassion, undertanding).
  
• Full accord “with united souls” (a combination of the two above – i. e. TRUTH AND LOVE).
• One mind (not clones, but scratch us and we bleed the same way).
  
• NO rivalry or conceit = opposite = poor me 'no one talks' versus living for self.
  
• Humility, NOT Mariah Heap “ever so 'umble.”
  
• Count others more significant than yourselves.
  
• Look out, not only for your own interests, but for those of others = being kind to others. “IF ONLY EVERYONE WAS LIKE THAT.” JESUS WOULD BE LIKE THAT.
  
• Do all things without grumbling or questioning (verse 14).
  
• We are to do EVERYTHING for the good of others, not ourselves (e.g. ministry, workplace, etc.). CHOICES FOR THEIR BENEFIT ARE NOT EASIEST!
  
• Genuinely concerned for your welfare (verse 20).
  
• They all seek their own interests, not those of Jesus Christ (verse 21).

How and why do we do it? Mixed in!!! (READ verses 5-13.)

• Constant refrain - “IN CHRIST.” This mind is in Christ—ours by union with him and by following his example.
  
• MODEL = DO LIKEWISE. He who lived and died for others.
  
• We have PURPOSE!
  
• CHOICES—He didn't grasp his right of equality. he laid his rights down.
  
• Made himself nothing, rather than self-fullfillment or getting that promotion.
  
• Made himself like us, not holding himself aloof as superior (e.g. racism).
  
• Became obedient—not independent. JOURNEY FROM HEAVEN TO THE CROSS.
  
• Sacrificed himself for us—not just his preferences, but his life! — OUR CHOICES.
  
• Another reason here is because God raises the humble up.
  
• James 4:6—But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble."
  
• Matthew 23:12—"Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted."
  
• Because we need to learn to OBEY this Lord over all! CHOOSE TO FOLLOW.
  
• Lloyd-Jones: Best summary of the Christian life is to “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure.” (verses 12-13).
  
• BY LOVING GOD, EACH OTHER, AND THE WORLD.

For the unbeliever, it's no use to just try and live like this. You need the Jesus who died for you and was raised for you to come and live in you and empower you.

I was glad to receive this e-mail from a regular reader who disagrees with some of what I said recently about abortion and Gordon Brown's position.

Dear Adrian,

As a regular reader of your blog, I am pleased that you are highlighting the issue of abortion. You may also be interested in this video of Peter Saunders.

However, I disagree with you about whether this should be party political issues.

You said — "This is based on the fundamental principle that the people of the UK do not elect parties, they elect individuals to serve them, and on moral questions those representatives are best placed to make those judgment calls."

I would like to see political parties taking a stance [on] abortion like in America. Without this, I don't see much [chance] of dramatically changing the law on abortion.

I think the USA can make a better claim to saying that they elect individuals rather than parties.

In the United States, I think people [can] exercise greater choice over who there (sic) elected representatives are. For example, in the Florida presidential primaries held this year, about 1.89 million people voted for Republican candidates, and about 1.67 million people voted for Democratic candidates—meaning over 3,570,128 people voted in a PRIMARY election [1], out of a population of 18.25 million [2] — around 20% of the total population — the population eligible to vote would be smaller.

In contrast, when David Cameron was elected leader of the Conservative Party, he got just 134,446 votes. [3] Mike Huckabee came 4th in the Florida primary, but got roughly double the number of votes in Florida alone that David Cameron got in total in his leadership election. [1]

In terms of selection for parliamentary seats — primaries for the US Congress can get [a] turnout of around 10% or 20%. [4, 5] In contrast, MPs have been selected as the candidate for safe Conservative seats with just 0.3% Conservative voters voting for them. [6]

In summary, I think the general US population has far greater say in who the candidates of the main parties are. People don't just vote between the two or three people with a chance of winning the election.

I believe that elections in the UK are more based on party (as opposed to individual) than they are in the USA — after all, the leader of the biggest party in the UK is the prime minister, without necessarily having been elected to that office himself (e.g. Gordon Brown now and John Major until 1992).

US primaries mean that voters get a say in the position of the candidates at election. For example, even though the Republican Party campaigns on a pro-life party platform, [7] Republican primary voters had the choice to select a range of presidential candidates, from the strongly pro-life Mike Huckabee to the pro-choice Rudy Giuliani. I believe that Rudy Giuliani's pro-choice views [8] contributed to his failure to win the Republican nomination, and has ensured that the Republican candidate is relatively more pro-life than the Democratic candidate.

If we had a better "primary" system in Britain, then there [would be] a better chance that candidates for a political party would reflect the views of the party grassroots. This means pro-life Conservatives could have a better chance of ensuring that the Conservative candidate was pro-life — as I think happens to some extent with the Republican party in the USA.

Currently, however, we have to vote for the better party, and no party is clearly better on abortion. I want the parties to take a clear stance [on] the issue of abortion so that I can vote for the party that I agree with. The Labour government is introducing damaging legislation (from a pro-life perspective), but consistently seems to argue that this should not lose them votes. In 2005, after Michael Howard expressed personal support for lowering the abortion limit to 20 weeks, Tony Blair appeared to argue that if you are pro-life, then there shouldn't be a way for this to affect your vote — arguing that abortion should not be an election issue. [9]

It could be argued that given low turnout at candidate selection election in the UK, there is more chance for a small group of party members to influence a parties (sic) position on a particular issue. However, there are also concerns about how democratic selection of MEP candidates for the Conservative Party is — where the candidates do not necessarily represent the views of party supporters (e.g. on attitudes on the EU).[10]

A vote for the Conservative Party may be marginally better than a vote for Labour on pro-life issues — as some senior Tory MP support more restrictions on abortion.[11] However, a vote for the Conservative Party is not a vote for a pro-life party. There seems to be little chance of any government (including a Conservative one) ending abortion soon.

If the Conservatives (or another party) took a pro-life stance, there would be a clear electoral way to change the law on abortion. Currently I don't know know how I could vote to end abortion unless I happen to be in a constituency with a strongly pro-life candidate.

In contrast, a vote for John McCain in America could realistically result in appointments to the Supreme Court that would result in Roe vs Wade being overturned. [12] This would not end abortion in America, but it would be real progress.

Best wishes,
Ben

References

[1] Voting Figures for Florida Primaries
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#FL

[2] Population Figures for Florida
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida

[3] David Cameron's Election as Conservative Party Leader
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4502652.stm

[4] 2000 Virginia Congressional Primary
http://www2.sbe.virginia.gov/web_docs/election/results/2000/jun_primary/pj00_dis_turnout.html

[5] New Orleans Primaries for U.S. House of Representatives
http://www.nola.com/news/index.ssf/2008/03/congressional_primary_saturday.html

[6] Selection of Conservative Candidate for Cambridgeshire North East
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/goldlist/2008/01/cambridgeshire.html

[7] Republic Party Advertising Their Pro-Life Positions
http://faithandvalues.gop.com/GroupPage.aspx?

[8] Justin Taylor on Concern From Pro-Life Christians About the Chances of Rudy Giuliani Being the Republican Presidential Nominee
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2007/10/guiliani-vs-clinton-what-should-pro.html

[9] Tony Blair on Voting About Abortion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4349581.stm

[10] Complaints About the Conservative Party MEP Selection Process
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/goldlist/2008/04/the-story-of-ho.html

[11] Senior Tories Promise to Vote for Lower Abortion Limit
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2008/05/senior-tories-p.html

[12] Justin Taylor Notes That Voting for John McCain is the Best Hope of Limiting Abortion
http://theologica.blogspot.com/2008/02/dobson-on-mccain.html

Earlier this week, I posted on Gordon Brown's antagonism towards pro-lifers. I thought I would remind us of the opportunity that exists for us to do something about the forthcoming law if we live in the UK. There have been 6.7 million abortions since 1967 in the UK.


Here are some things you can do if you live in the UK.

1. PRAY, that God will work a miracle in the House. Emotions run high at the moment in Westminster so anything is possible. Well, actually even our non-British readers can do this for us!

2. FIND OUT MORE about the issues. The following websites are worth visiting

• Alive and Kicking 
  
• Christian Medical Fellowship
• SPUC
• Passion for Life
• Parliamentary Pro-Life Group
• BBC on Abortion Debate.
• Netdoctor page on Abortion in the UK.

I also preached on the subject of murder and how abortion is simply that a few weeks back.  I also speak of the forgiveness that is available for any who have actually had an abortion themselves.

3. LOOK UP YOUR MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT'S VOTING RECORD.

4. WRITE TO YOUR MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT I attach the letter I wrote to my MP. If I get a reply I will share it here. Please do not simply copy and paste my letter, but feel free to use it as a basis to adapt.

Dear MP,

May I begin by thanking your for what I understand has been your voting record in the matter of abortion. As a medical doctor I have been in lectures where it has been openly stated that "every pregnancy is bad for a mothers health" and so therefore they see it is ok to offer social abortions "on demand". I do not believe that was the intention of the original abortion law. I would therefore ask you that with regard to the forthcoming Embryo bill, you would consider

Voting against the creation of animal/human hybrid embryos. Such a move is not medically necessary as adult stem cell research is productive and it is already possible to create cells that express single human proteins.

Voting against offering permission for IVF doctors to create "saviour siblings" chosen specifically to provide donor tissue to their sick older brother or sister. This devalues the lives of the embryos discarded.

Voting against the removal of the requirement for IVF clinics to consider the need for a father figure when deciding whether to offer treatment. Insufficient work has been done on the psychological impact of being raised without a father figure at least peripherally present in a child's life. We should not be further undermining the family in this way.

Voting against the removal of the requirement that doctors sign a form stating that an abortion is in the interest of a woman’s health. This requirement should instead by enforced and specific criteria to limit abortion to its original intent should be enacted. In the absence of a total ban on abortion I am in favor of any effort to remedy the current situation where it is available to anyone irrespective of their circumstances.

Voting in favor of the reduction to the term limit for abortion from 24 weeks to 20, saving 2,948 of the 193,000 lives taken by abortion each year in the UK.

I would be happy to speak with you further about any of these issues, and wish you success in your efforts to represent this area.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Adrian Warnock
http://adrianwarnock.com

5. WRITE TO THE PRIME MINISTER Here is what I wrote, but again please adapt this letter to make it personal.

Dear Mr Brown,

I am writing to express my anger and disappointment that you would overturn the tradition that matters of morality are not appropriate for the use of the Whip. I know you have allowed your MPs a free vote on certain amendments of the forthcoming Embryo legislation. I urge you to stop your vocal support of the whole law which is I believe immoral and allow your party the freedom to vote with their conscience. I also urge you to allow more time for the important debates on this matter.

Yours

Adrian Warnock
http://adrianwarnock.com

6.  Sign a petition at the Alive and Kicking website or at Number 10 where the following are open

• Childs right to a father
  
• End Abortion.

Okay—political post warning. For those who think Christians should not engage in the political process or write political commentary, I suppose you’d better pass on by. But equally for those looking for an unequivocal statement of support for a particular party or leader, again pass on by.

I think it’s important that we have opinions on political matters. And while I don’t often write about politics here on my blog, I have done so occasionally. For example, last December I expressed my strong concerns about the leadership ability of Gordon Brown, who is our current prime minister. Since then, even a member of his own party has claimed that Brown was put on earth to remind us all of how good Tony Blair was. There have also been no fewer than three sets of memoirs published that haven’t exactly portrayed him very well, and there have been a string of mistakes he has made which have been well catalogued in the British media.

What I want to highlight today is a serious blow to the very heart of our political system. It has always been the case that on matters of conscience, such as morality, our political parties do not have official policy. There is an unwritten agreement that members of Parliament and the Lords will always be given a free vote on such matters as abortion and embryo experimentation. This is based on the fundamental principle that the people of the UK do not elect parties, they elect individuals to serve them, and on moral questions those representatives are best placed to make those judgment calls. This has had a number of effects. It has not meant that we necessarily have more moral laws. What it does mean is that, unlike the U.S., where it seems such things are decided by unelected lawyers in the Supreme Court, if we want the law changed all we have to do is elect the right people.

Since the right people in the UK do not necessarily belong to particular political parties, it has also had the result that Christians are far less wedded to the Conservative party than their counterparts in the U.S. are to the Republicans. In fact, many Christians would have voted for Tony Blair, who was known as a man of some faith (which is perhaps relatively unusual in our politicians). Many Christians in the UK are, however, still rather detached from the political system, which is arguably as much a bad thing as being overly embroiled in it.

Gordon Brown risks awakening a sleeping bear in our nation for he has turned the status quo on its head. Despite howls of protest, even from some of his cabinet members (some of whom are Catholic), he is making a certain bill before the house currently into what is called a “whipped” bill for members of his party. The other parties are still allowing freedom of conscience.

Brown initially stated that his party would be forced to vote in favor of every provision in the act. Now, in true Brown style, he has climbed down, but only in a meaningless partial and tokenistic way. His members will be allowed to vote with their conscience on individual portions of the bill, but then if the portions are passed, when the bill as a whole comes before them they will be forced to vote in favor irrespective of their religious or ethical convictions. He is also being criticized for placing very short time limits on the debates over these vital issues.

This all sets a dangerous precedent, and is very worrying to Christians, especially considering the provisions being considered, which are as follows:

• The creation of animal/human hybrid embryos.
  
  
• Permission for IVF doctors to create "saviour siblings" chosen specifically to provide donor tissue to their sick older brother or sister.
  
  
• Removal of the requirement for IVF clinics to consider the need for a father figure when deciding whether to offer treatment.
  
  
• Removal of the requirement that doctors sign a form stating that an abortion is in the interest of a woman’s health.
  
  
• Reduction to the term limit for abortion from 24 weeks to 20, saving 2,948 of the 193,000 lives taken by abortion each year in the UK.

Please pray that there will be a miraculous turnaround and that somehow we might be delivered from these things becoming law (except perhaps the last one, which is, of course, a step in the right direction).

Here are notes from a sermon I preached on the 27^th April at Jubilee Church. The mp3 is available to download here or listen to using the following embedded player-

“You shall not murder.” (Ex 20:13)

Ok, right at the outset, do we have any murderers here? No? Anyone planning on committing a murder? No? Good, so then we can all go home, yes? We got it straight, since we live in a Christian country means its Chicken for dinner tonight rather than human. Lets go get some coffee.

Actually there is some more to this commandment than first meets the eye.

No careless killing ESV footnote "also causing human death through carelessness or negligence" so see for example Ex 21:28-29 “When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox shall not be liable. But if the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not kept it in, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.”

Deuteronomy 22:8: “When you build a new house, you shall make a parapet for your roof, that you may not bring blood-guilt on your house if anyone falls from it.”

Risk assessment is biblical! “[The Jew] was to do everything humanly possible not to cause the death of another person” -The Master's Seminary, Master's Seminary Journal Volume 11, 11:206 (Master's Seminary, 2000; 2003).

- Therefore, human life is precious we should take good care of it. Every human is made in Gods image and therefore worth looking after. It is the Christian faith that teaches us we are not just the outcome of millions of years of chance reactions. We don't kill because life itself is a gift of God. We should also support initiatives that reduce the risk of death or serious injury.

eg car and road safety - 1 in 200 risk of dying on the roads! So driving at no more than 30 mph in built up areas is a good idea due to the dramatic risk of death if hit faster. 95% live if hit at 20mph, 90% die at 40mph. Also wear seat belts, pay for proper maintenance, and buy the safest car you can afford.

-also health measures, smoking in public bans is good as it will lead to less premature death. Form of Russian Roulette – 50% will die prematurely loosing ave of 16 years of precious God-given life. In country after country smoking bans have led to dramatic drops in the rates of heart attacks – 17% in Scotland for example in one year. Christians should support the provision of good health care and also simple social changes that can make massive impact by saving lives. Especially in developing world eg lack of clean water.

However, although this commandment applies to careless killing, there were clear distinctions made in the punishment depending on the intent “(1) the weapon used, (2) the enmity of the killer toward his victim, and (3) premeditation” (Numbers 35. 16–24) -The Master's Seminary, Master's Seminary Journal Volume 11, 11:205 (Master's Seminary, 2000; 2003).

Similar rules are still used today.

What other things that might be called murder?

-We have seen that negligence such as careless fighting or driving, is surely potential murder by the broader hebraic definition. But what of some areas that may be less clear to some. Lets be very clear here -

-Euthanasia or so-called “mercy killing”- so far even the unbelievers cannot bring themselves to legalize this in the UK. How could we know someone really understood what they were asking for and weren't coerced or depressed? Bible simply says "no killing". This surely even applies to some of the grey areas being discussed such as removing food and drink via tubes from brain damaged.

-Assisting Suicide remains illegal, but what about neglecting to prevent it?. Psychiatric services should be used appropriately... sadly the quality of our services vary. But people have a right to be treated against their will when they pose a danger to themselves and are not in their right minds.

-Abortion? We all agree that life exists after birth. We believe it is wrong to murder a newborn baby. So surely life exists just before. When then does it start? There is no logic to our current term limits for abortion- loosely based on when a child might survive "independently" outside the womb. But when technology improves will that mean the date changes? And, since a baby is not truly "independent" are they less fully human?

Our question should simply be is this a human? Does he or she have the image of God? If so we must protect, not kill. John the Baptist leapt for joy in his mothers womb whom when he met Jesus (Luke 1:44) and Psalm 139 makes plain God saw us and knew us there as he knit us together.

-Contraception? Pre conception fine, anything that definitely acts post conception is clearly not. Some methods are controversial as to their mode of action (eg oral contraceptive pill, coil etc). Christians should examine the evidence for themselves, pray, seek advice if needed then make the decision their conscience is happy with.

-IVF? Christians undergoing this procedure may wish to speak with their doctors about the fate of so-called "spare" embryos. Although they are routinely discarded, this need not be the case.

-War? The police? Romans 13.1-4 "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.”

In the end this boils down to a simple question. If you were holding an armed gun, and had a chance to kill someone who was definitely about to kill another, would you be wrong to pull that trigger? The balance of the bible strongly suggests that you would not be wrong to do that.

So far, though, for the vast majority of us, none of this will have touched us. Perhaps there are some in the room who have had an abortion, if so, please bear with me as there is forgiveness for you as we will explain later.

But for the rest of us there is a danger that we will feel morally superior and proud of ourselves. So we haven't murdered... Big deal! If we think that makes us worthy of praise by God we are deluded!

Jesus punctures that bubble by saying “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder; and whoever murders will be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire. So if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.” Matthew 5.21-24

Words can kill!

“Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” 1 Jn 3:15

“It is not only the act, but also the sentiment underlying the act, which is evil” - Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible, Map on lining papers., 2044 (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Book House, 1988).

“You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning” Jn 8:44

Actual murder is just the extension of anger and bitterness. Billy Grahams wife was once asked if she had ever considered divorce during their long marriage her answer- "divorce, NO! Murder, YES!"

If murder is sometimes the ultimate punishment for some imagined harm done by its victim, forgiveness is the opposite. Far from merely not murdering our enemies, God calls us to love them and forgive them.

We are told to forgive as we have been forgiven and warned that he will not forgive us if we do not forgive others.

Christians should be recognized as those who practice the reverse of murder. If murder is treating someone as sub-human and a less valuable object then the opposite is surely thinking of others as more important than you and selflessly loving them expecting nothing in return.

You can't murder someone you love. Jesus said love fulfills the law - love God covers the first few commandments, love your neighbor covers the rest.

God is the ultimate forgiver. We see this in the sad story of King David. We see the king who is described as the man after Gods own heart that the smallest sin can grow to become a major one. Most murders happen as a result of an argument between for example husband and wife. It is even possible that by causing us to stop and realize how dangerous anger is that this sermon might prevent a future murder.

Owen once said “be killing sin or it will be killing you.”

In Davids case, laziness led to a roaming eye. In our day he'd have visited certain websites or the top shelf at the news-agent. Then, he went on the roof to catch a glance at a woman bathing. That led to adultery. That led to deception and trickery. That led to murder.

Sin is sin. We stand before God bankrupt. When you are bankrupt it doesn't really matter if you owe a few thousands or a few million. You simply can never pay. An eternity in hell facing the wrath of God wont wipe away our sins.

The scandal of the cross is that on it, a man was murdered. Without removing the moral responsibility for that act, and the fact that we are all guilty of killing the son of God....ultimately there was something else going on.

The cross was a judicial killing. God the Almighty poured out his righteous wrath and punishment on his son. Jesus paid our debt. Not only did he cancel our debts, he credited our account with his righteousness. If you are a christian this morning he is as pleased with you not just as if you never sinned but just as if you were always righteous or put another way he is as thrilled with you as he is with Jesus!

Murderers are Invited to become Christians. Why? Because God can even forgive murderers, So he can forgive you.

Up until now, I have mostly resisted getting drawn into commenting on US politics. I still think I probably won't do too many of these kinds of posts — I've always thought it was none of my business! But tell me, my fair readers, do you want me to talk more about all this?

I thought yesterday’s decision by the Supreme Court upholding the ban on partial birth abortion would throw the upcoming presidential election into sharp relief, and I was right. Here’s what some of the candidates had to say:


DEMOCRAT

• Hillary Clinton — "This decision marks a dramatic departure from four decades of Supreme Court rulings that upheld a woman's right to choose and recognized the importance of women's health. Today's decision blatantly defies the Court's recent decision in 2000 striking down a state partial-birth abortion law because of its failure to provide an exception for the health of the mother. As the Supreme Court recognized in Roe v. Wade in 1973, this issue is complex and highly personal; the rights and lives of women must be taken into account. It is precisely this erosion of our constitutional rights that I warned against when I opposed the nominations of Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Alito."
  
  
• Joe Biden — No comment yet.
  
  
• Chris Dodd — No comment yet.
  
  
• John Edwards — "I could not disagree more strongly with today's Supreme Court decision. The ban upheld by the Court is an ill-considered and sweeping prohibition that does not even take account for serious threats to the health of individual women. This hard right turn is a stark reminder of why Democrats cannot afford to lose the 2008 election. Too much is at stake — starting with, as the Court made all too clear today, a woman's right to choose.”
  
  
• Mike Gravel — No comment yet.
  
  
• Dennis Kucinich — No comment yet.
  
  
• Barak Obama — "I strongly disagree with today’s Supreme Court ruling, which dramatically departs from previous precedents safeguarding the health of pregnant women. As Justice Ginsburg emphasized in her dissenting opinion, this ruling signals an alarming willingness on the part of the conservative majority to disregard its prior rulings respecting a woman’s medical concerns and the very personal decisions between a doctor and patient. I am extremely concerned that this ruling will embolden state legislatures to enact further measures to restrict a woman's right to choose, and that the conservative Supreme Court justices will look for other opportunities to erode Roe v. Wade, which is established federal law and a matter of equal rights for women."

REPUBLICAN

• Sam Brownback — "I'm delighted that the Supreme Court is moving forward to see the expression of life in the Constitution. I hope that some day we’ll see all life respected at all stages and protected in this land and around the world."
  
  
• John Cox — "Against abortion and for life without any exceptions. Life begins at conception."
  
  
• Rudy Giuliani — "The Supreme Court reached the correct conclusion in upholding the congressional ban on partial birth abortion. I agree with it."
  
  
• Duncan Hunter — No comment yet.
  
  
• John McCain — "Today's Supreme Court ruling is a victory for those who cherish the sanctity of life and integrity of the judiciary. The ruling ensures that an unacceptable and unjustifiable practice will not be carried out on our innocent children. It also clearly speaks to the importance of nominating and confirming strict constructionist judges who interpret the law as it is written, and do not usurp the authority of Congress and state legislatures. As we move forward, it is critically important that our party continues to stand on the side of life."
  

• Ron Paul — No comment yet.
  
  
• Mitt Romney — "Today, our nation's highest court reaffirmed the value of life in America by upholding a ban on a practice that offends basic human decency. This decision represents a step forward in protecting the weakest and most innocent among us."
  
  
• Tom Tancredo — "Congressman Tom Tancredo (R- CO) rejoiced over today’s Supreme Court decision, ending partial birth abortions. In these abortions, usually performed late in a pregnancy, the infant’s skull is crushed and extracted from the womb. Today the Supreme Court put an end to this barbaric practice of infanticide, Tancredo said. One can only hope this is the first step towards ending the tragedy of abortions. This ruling, won by a 5-4 margin, is the first major victory for pro-life activists since Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito were appointed to the Supreme Court. Both of them voted in the majority, along with Justices Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony Kennedy. Congressman Tancredo concluded by saying, 'I am pleased the Court has finally begun to address the moral and intellectual travesty of Roe vs. Wade.'"
  
  
• Tommy Thompson — "I commend the United States Supreme Court for upholding the nation’s ban on partial-birth abortions. This decision sends a clear message that the United States values life and has no tolerance for this gruesome, abhorrent way to take a life. There is no place for partial-birth abortions in this country, and I am pleased the court upheld the law passed by Congress."

The definition of when "life" enters a baby who is in the womb is a challenge for anyone who believes that it is at a different point from conception or at least implantation. The common alternative view is that it is when a baby is "viable". The following story reveals the moving goalposts of this. Of course, if we accept this moving goalpost as a definition, we are bound to eventually find that an artificial womb is created that can sustain life from the moment of conception to birth. It really isn't too difficult to imagine that — after all, all the baby needs is a supply of nutrients and oxygen delivered to its placenta. We have artificial lungs and hearts already, as well as IV feeds. In, say fifty years' time, when such a device has been created, will our secular ethicists start to argue alongside the Christians that a baby developing in the womb is "alive" and deserves protection under law from the very beginning?

"A baby has been born at one day less than 22 weeks gestation, has survived, and is doing well. This birth may have significant ramifications for abortion law because it reduces the time of viability to just over half a normal gestation period. It may impact futile care theory and the occasional attempts to refuse wanted life-sustaining treatment for prematurely born babies. The birth could affect personhood theory, at least for those who refuse to depersonalize born infants, because it could materially alter their moral view of the moral worth of later-stage fetuses. So, welcome to the world, Amillia Sonja Taylor. Your birth might become a significant event for expanding the perception of who qualifies to be in the human family." (Wesley J. Smith, Secondhand Smoke)

If you'd like to read some commentary on the issue, here's the link to NewsBusters that talks about the media's reporting of it.