Election voting proposed for the Sabbath
MANY Christians have been afraid that parliamentary and local government elections will be held on the Lords Day. Now some government ministers have indicated that this is a possibility. The Government is proposing radical changes, which include the probability of opening polling stations at weekends in the hope of boosting turn-out and curbing voter apathy.
Mr Jack Straw, the Home Secretary, gave his personal backing to the reforms and indicated his preference for elections following the European pattern by being held at weekends, “with polling stations open on Saturdays and Sundays”.
Although the Government mentions “Saturdays” as well as “Sundays”, it also speaks about the possibility of holding the next European elections on the same “day” not “days” as local government elections. We believe that we are justified in fearing that that “same day” will eventually be the Sabbath.
In any case, although the use of Saturday as well as the Sabbath will allow those with conscientious objections to Sabbath voting to still vote, it is shocking and depressing to every lover of the Lords day that such God-defying desecration of His holy day would take place at all.
Such rebellion against the Holy One of Israel will surely bring His displeasure upon us. A nations prosperity is inextricably tied up with its observance, or otherwise, of the Sabbath. God said to Israel, “If thou turn away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the holy of the LORD, honourable; and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: then shalt thou delight thyself in the LORD; and I will cause thee to ride upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob thy father: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it” (Isa. 59:13,14).
Peppered moths and evolution
EVOLUTION has never been able to claim much hard evidence to justify its existence as a fundamental belief of our time. One piece of evidence long held dear by evolutionists as lending support to their theories concerned the two forms of the peppered moth light and dark. As pollution increased from industry, tree trunks became darker. Lighter forms of the moth now stood out more clearly and were more likely to be eaten by birds, or so the story went, for the proportion of light moths decreased dramatically. More recently, as pollution has decreased, the number of light moths has again exceeded the number of dark moths.
The scientist who preformed most of the experiments in this area claimed that if Darwin had known of them, “he would have witnessed the consummation and confirmation of his lifes work”. In fact, Darwin would not have been justified in taking any comfort from them. In the first place, such variation within a kind (in the sense of Genesis 1) gives no support to the theory that one species has evolved from another over millions of ages from the simplest form of life to man. Changes within a kind are common enough; one of the most obvious examples is the breeding of dogs. Evidence showing variation within a kind is no argument against the Genesis account of creation.
The latest information is that the experiments on the peppered moth were fatally flawed. For instance, birds were filmed showing a preference for the lighter, and less camouflaged moths, as they ate them off tree trunks during the day, but in fact the moths never rest on tree trunks during the day; they rest on the leaves in the top of trees. For the experiments, dead moths were glued onto trees. One university biologist made the comment that textbooks and films about this subject have featured “a lot of fraudulent photographs”. Another evolutionary biologist, who describes the peppered moth story as having been “the prize horse in our stable”, now agrees that it has to be thrown out. Yet, doubtless, these experiments will continue to appear in textbooks for years to come as solid evidence for evolution.
The pity is that so many will not accept the true account of how we, and the whole universe, got here: “In the beginning God created . . . ” K.D.M.
Believing anything or nothing
THE Church of England General Synod has announced that the Church is preparing “fresh doctrines on sex, money, time and power . . . as part of a campaign to present itself as a clear-thinking, teaching Church in touch with its flock.” The Church will also seek to reach clear definitions of its teaching on cloning, genetic manipulation, organ transplants, prolonging of life, death and euthanasia.
The Church of England certainly has much need of clear thinking with regard to teaching of Scripture, considering that it has the reputation, as the Bishop of Ely stated at the General Synod, for “believing anything or nothing”. This is the view of many of its members also. A new survey among worshippers showed that, while the Church is “good at conducting weddings”, it “failed to stand up adequately for its beliefs, to make its voice heard and to spread the Gospel”. Most of them thought that the most important issue for the Church was “spreading Jesus message” and “giving a moral lead”.
The woman in charge of the research stated, “The general concern is that we are perceived as a divided Church, with leaders that sit on the fence on most issues because they do not want to offend anyone.” How true! Some of those interviewed rightly described the Church when they compared it to “a chameleon that changes colour to suit the background”.
According to the Archbishop of Canterbury, the bishops were “shattered” by how poorly the Church was perceived by its own members. The question is, Will their being “shattered” move the bishops to present the truth of Scripture faithfully and fully to their people? Men like the notorious former Bishop of Durham, David Jenkins, who hold heretical views, have largely contributed to this deplorable situation. The fact that the General Synod has also taken steps to discipline clergy who deviate from orthodox doctrine is possibly a step in the right direction.
The crying need of the parishes of England and Scotland is the same as that of Israel in Hoseas day. His solemn message to Israel was: “Hear the word of the LORD, ye children of Israel: for the LORD hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor mercy, nor knowledge of God in the land. . . . My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children” (Hoses 4:1,6).