The Enigma of Islam
That Islam is a religion that breeds violence can hardly be denied. Vile, brutal murders have been committed in its name in the past few months in Australia, Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Kenya, Nigeria, France and probably numerous other countries as well. Hardly a day goes by without a mass-murder being committed or attempted in the name of religion by a Muslim somewhere in the world, frequently against fellow Muslims of a different sect. Furthermore, Islam shows a good understanding of the power of the Establishment Principle, foolishly rejected by so many in the Christian Church; in every country where Islam gets a foothold it seeks to establish itself as the only permitted religion in that country. The murders in Australia, Kenya, Nigeria and France have a lot to do with intimidating opposition in these countries to the spread of Islam.
The secular powers in Western Europe have no answer to the advance of Islam. They are not prepared to execute murderers, so that terrorists have a stronger weapon – death – than they dare to use themselves. The promotion of homosexuality, abortion and contraception in these countries leaves birth-rates very low, so that the Muslim population rapidly outbreeds the non-Muslim population and establishes expanding Muslim enclaves. And the blinded principles of the secularists leave them reluctant to oppose Islam, or even to allow opposition to it, so that they nurture that which threatens, in a short while, to destroy their hedonistic lifestyle. The danger, however, they will not openly admit. Islam is a scourge sent by God to afflict a society that has turned its back upon Him and upon His Son, Jesus Christ.
The enigma of Islam, however, is that most Muslims who have come to the West have probably done so, not with an intention of Islamisation, but simply in pursuit of a more comfortably prosperous way of life. Living in countries where truth and kindness were something of a rarity, where little worked properly, and where religious violence and murder were a daily occurrence, there was an attraction in a country of relative prosperity, efficiency, safety and peace. Such people must view the spread of Islam with mixed feelings. Their religious principles are forced to approve it, and yet they recognise it as the very thing that they moved away from. The corruption, the acid attacks, the honour killings and the terrorism were what they left behind.
The result of this seems to be a vulnerability within Islam which Satan recognises. It is evidently important for his kingdom to keep the gospel away from Muslims, or else to terrify them out of embracing it, by fear of death. Both in Islamic and non-Islamic countries, there seems to be an awareness that the West has, or has had, something that is lacking in Islam. This “something”, of course, is the Person and the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. Some Muslims react to this perceived lack with fury and terrorism, but others show an openness and a readiness to learn about Christ. Perhaps herein lies the resolution of the problem of Islam. Perhaps the ongoing confrontation between Islam and the secular West will be the divine instrument to lead many, enslaved under both systems, to recognise that the One in whom truth and goodness are found is Jesus Christ. “There be many that say, Who will shew us any good? Lord, lift Thou up the light of Thy countenance upon us” (Ps 4:6). DWBS
Free Speech
Following the horrendous shootings by Muslim gunmen at the offices of the French satirical magazine, Charlie Hebdo, there has been a great outpouring of support for “free speech”. The magazine had long resisted pressure to tone down their mockery of Islam, and particularly the depiction of Mohammed. Now that vengeance has been taken, the media in general have been anxious to protect their freedom to speak as they please; huge rallies have gathered in support of free speech; and politicians have joined in.
For instance, Harriet Harman, the deputy leader of the Labour Party in the UK, spoke strongly in a radio discussion in favour of free speech. She referred in particular to the repeal of the Blasphemy Act as a positive move. Entertainers and the media are free to speak as irreverently as they please about the Most High without being restrained by the civil law. And many of them take full advantage of their liberty. In France Charlie Hebdo has a reputation for belittling religion in general, not merely Islam.
But, in fact, the law permits no one to speak or write just as they please. In recent days, a number of people in France have been arrested for glorifying terrorism. No free speech there. People in the UK have been arrested for pointing out in public the sinfulness of homosexuality – although the law has recently been clarified on this issue – a welcome change. But the danger remains that preachers of the gospel may lose the right to speak freely.
In this note it is not intended to try to draw a line between speech which should be illegal and what is acceptable. Clearly, for instance, almost everyone would agree that libel should be unacceptable. But, in practice, what comes under the protection of the campaign for free speech is obscenity and blasphemy. While people ought to restrain themselves from speaking and writing in such ways, there ought to be laws against both obscenity and blasphemy to be used when self-restraint is absent. And we ourselves must seek, by God’s grace, to “be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation” (Phil 2:15).
Further Educational Issues
Now that the Marriage and Civil Partnership (Scotland) bill has become law and marriage has been redefined in Scotland, the Scottish Government is incorporating the new definition into its updated Draft Guidance on the Conduct of Relationships, Sexual Health and Parenthood Education in Scottish Schools (RSHP). It includes the statement that “it is legal and permissible to discuss homosexuality in schools”.
The guidance which is bound up with the Curriculum for Excellence affects children and young people from 3 to 18 and purports to take cognisance of their various relational needs. It highlights “attitudes”, “beliefs”, “moral issues”, “the value of commitment in relationships and partnerships – including marriage” and the “importance of family relationships”. There is an emphasis on developing “mental, emotional, social and physical well-being now and in the future” and a call to all who work in schools to facilitate this development. However, it is clear that “same-sex” relationships and “marriages” are not only to be considered normal and acceptable but are to be vigorously promoted in this programme. Sadly, what the Word of God says is no longer counted as having much relevance in our modern society.
It is considered good practice for all schools to consult with, and inform, parents and carers on key aspects of the curriculum. Parents and carers are encouraged to view school materials, while teachers are advised to be sensitive to “cultural views and religious beliefs”. However, the agenda has a decidedly sinister tone to it. For example, one point is: “In issuing this guidance it is the Scottish Government’s expectation that if a teacher, child, or young person is asked to do something against his or her conscience, he or she should be able to raise this with the school or local authority. The Scottish Government would expect alternative arrangements to be made where possible.” On the face of it, there would appear to be an opt-out clause, yet the language is weak and there is no guarantee that a person who has an issue of conscience will be listened to.
Further statements indicate that “schools must be sensitive to the cases in which a parent or carer may wish to withdraw a child or young person from all or part of a planned sexual health education programme”; yet persuasion is to be encouraged and the child’s views must be taken into account, “given their statutory right to an education”. (We are concerned that parents should have the right to bring their child up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.) Even when the parent or carer is “allowed” to withdraw that child from the specific class, the guidelines go on to state, “Aspects of RSHP education may be discussed in many areas of the curriculum, and it would not be possible for a child or young person “to be withdrawn from lessons across the curriculum as this would prevent a child or young person receiving an adequate and holistic education”. There is a determination that schools “meet the experiences and outcomes” of the curriculum for a child “even if that child is withdrawn from a particular lesson”.
The pro-marriage group, Scotland for Marriage, warns that “parents who believe in traditional marriage are being sidelined by [this] draft sex-education guidance”. It fears that “teaching about marriage will be downgraded in sex education” and that “teachers who have concerns about the issue will not be protected”. A spokesman comments that these guidelines represent “a significant liberalising of the sex-education guidance, a failure to respect those who come from a faith or otherwise-traditionalist background, and a shocking contempt for the rights of parents”.
There is a note in the guidelines on publicly-funded denominational schools indicating that their religious authorities will continue to provide guidance at present, but “this national advice should serve as a useful basis for everyone”. The Humanist Society Scotland (HSS) is incensed by this concession, stating in its own intolerant way: “It is no longer acceptable that religious bodies should have a say in the sex and relationship education of children . . . Upholding a traditional marriage view . . . goes against equality”. The HSS goes on to object to any “opt out” clause for parents or carers and is calling on the Scottish Parliament “to force teachers to promote same-sex marriage, even if it contravenes their religious conscience”. This call is supported by Alison McInnes, the Scottish Liberal Democrat spokeswoman for Justice, and also by Patrick Harvie, convenor of the Scottish Green Party.
How sad that the young people of Scotland (and the rest of the UK) may be subjected to such immoral teaching in their schools with little counter-teaching, we fear, in many homes. As we noted last month, Satan is raging and seeking whom he may devour, and he is not short of means. And we have sinful hearts; we need the Lord’s cleansing. “Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed thereto according to Thy Word” (Ps 119:9). KHM
Church of Scotland Declension
The Church of Scotland has taken another step towards approving the ordination of ministers who are in same-sex relationships. The last General Assembly had accepted the proposal and sent it down to presbyteries under the Barrier Act, which requires innovative legislation to be passed, not only by the Assembly, but also by a majority of presbyteries. This step has now been taken and 32 out of 45 presbyteries (71%) have expressed agreement with the proposal. However, when individual presbytery members are counted, the result was much closer: 55% to 45%. The Church is in a dire position when the clear teaching of Scripture has again been rejected.
Church Information
Committee Meetings
Synod committees will meet, DV, in Inverness Free Presbyterian Church on Tuesday, March 17, as follows:
10.00 – 10.30 Church Interests Committee
10.30 – 12.00 Training of the Ministry Committee
12.00 – 1.00 Sabbath Observance Committee
2.00 – 3.00 Outreach Committee
2.00 – 5.00 Finance Committee
3.00 – 5.00 Religion and Morals Committee
6.00 – 7.30 Publications and Bookroom Committee
7.30 – 8.30 Welfare of Youth Committee
7.30 – 8.30 Dominions and Overseas Committee
(Rev) John MacLeod, Clerk of Synod
Statement by the Southern Presbytery
The Southern Presbytery of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, met in Glasgow on the twenty-fifth day of November 2014, places on record its thankfulness to God that 25 years ago, in 1988-1989, this Presbytery was given grace to uphold the requirements of Scripture when it exercised discipline over an elder for attending a requiem mass. The Presbytery also puts on record its thankfulness to God that the Synod of the Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, met in May 1989, upheld the Southern Presbytery’s decision.
Bookroom Fund
By appointment of Synod, the Special Collection on behalf of the Bookroom Fund, is due to be taken in congregations during February.
W Campbell, General Treasurer