eChurch Blog

This following article from the Christian Institute today is quite pertinent to me at the moment, because I was asked to embark on a project for a registering charity to develop an Internet forum for them. I was told that this was a church initiative, but dealing with issues that impact on everybody’s life in a negative way.

Everything was fine until I put my link on their forum, just a link to my website to let folks know who developed the forum (bearing in mind I hadn’t charged for any of my work for them). Now the fact of having an inbound link to my website as the developer was not the core problem for them, but the fact that my website is called ‘eChurchWebsites‘. The funders would not agree to any reference to ‘church’ or God or anything of that nature as we live in such a ‘PC’ conscious environment and the mention of the word ‘church’ in my link would have a negative impact on them as a charity.

I find it incredible that a ‘church initiative’ must now do everything in its power to hide the fact that it is ‘Christian’ driven…is it me or is this a world gone mad? Where does God get any of the glory?

Government failing to support faith groups

“He shall choose our inheritance for us” Psalm 47:4

The Christian is always pleased and delighted when he can see Christ in the
Scriptures. If he can but detect the footstep of his lord, and discover that
the sacred writers are making some reference to him, however indistinct or
dark he will rejoice there at: for all the Scriptures are nothing except as we
find Christ in them. St. Austin says, “The Scriptures are the swaddling
bands of the man-child-Christ Jesus, and were all intended to be hallowed
garments in which to wrap him “So they are; and it is our pleasant duty to
lift the veil, or remove the garment of Jesus and so behold him in his
person, in his nature, or his offices. Now, this text is concerning Jesus
Christ-he it is who is to “choose our inheritance for us,” he in whom
dwelleth all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge is the great Being who
is selected as the head of predestination-to choose our lot and our portion,
and fix our destiny. Verily, beloved brethren, you and I can rejoice in this
great fact, that our Savior chooses for us. For were we all to be assembled
together in some great plain, as Israel was of old, to elect for ourselves a
king, we should not propose a second candidate. There would be one who
stands like Saul, the son of Kish, head and shoulders taller than all the rest,
whom we should at once select to be our king and ruler of Providence for
us. We would not ask for some prudent sage or deeply taught philosopher;
we would not choose the most experienced senior; but, without a single
moment’s hesitation, directly we saw Jesus Christ, in the majesty of his
person, we should say, in the words of the Psalmist, He who redeemed us,
he who ransomed us, he who loved us-”He shall choose our inheritance for
us.”

I remember once going to a chapel where this happened to be the text, and
the good man who occupied the pulpit was more than a little of an
Arminian. Therefore, when he commenced, he said, “This passage refers
entirely to our temporal inheritance. It has nothing whatever to do with our
everlasting destiny: for,” said he, “We do not want Christ to choose for us
in the matter of heaven or hell. It is so plain and easy that every man who
has a grain of common sense will choose heaven; and any person would
know better than to choose hell. We have no need of any superior
intelligence, or any greater being, to choose heaven or hell for us. It is left
to our own free will, and we have enough wisdom given us, sufficiently
correct means to judge for ourselves, and therefore, as he very logically
inferred, there was no necessity for Jesus Christ, or any one, to make a
choice for us. We could choose the inheritance for ourselves without any
assistance.” Ah! but my good brother, it may be very true that we could,
but I think we should want something more than common sense before we
should choose aright. For you must recollect that it is not simply the
choosing of heaven or hell; it is the choosing of pleasure on earth, or of
pain of honor or of persecution; and very often the man is bewildered. If it
were just simply hell that a man had to choose, none would prefer it; but
since it is the sin which engenders hell, and the lust which brings him on to
punishment, there comes the difficulty. For by nature we are all inclined to
follow the way which leads downwards, we are naturally willing to walk
the road which leads to the pit-we do not seek the pit itself, but the road
that leads to it-and were it not for sovereign grace, none of us would ever
have followed the path to heaven. I am daily more and more convinced that
the difference between one man and another is, not the difference between
his use of his will, but the difference of grace that has been bestowed upon
him. So that if one man has his “inheritance in heaven,” it will be because
Christ chose his inheritance for him; and if another man has his place in
hell, it will be because he chose his inheritance himself. We do need some
one to choose for us in that matter; we want our Father to fix our eternal
destiny, and write our names in the book of life, otherwise, if left to
ourselves, the road to hell would be as naturally our choice as for a piece
of inanimate matter to roll downwards, instead of assisting itself upwards.
However, to come at once to our text, and leave every other person’s
observations alone, “He shall choose our inheritance for us.” First, I shall
speak of the text as being a glorious fact — “He shall choose our
inheritance for us.” And, secondly, I will speak of it as being a very just
and wise prayer — “He shall choose our inheritance for us.”

I. First, then, I shall speak of this as being A GLORIOUS FACT. It is a great
truth that God does choose the inheritance for his people. It is a very high
honor conferred upon God’s servants, that it is said of them, “He shall
choose their inheritance.” As for the worldling, God gives him anything,
but for the Christian, God selects the best portion, and chooses his
inheritance for him. Says a good divine, “It is one of the greatest glories of
the Church of Christ, that our mighty Maker, and our Friend, always
chooses our inheritance for us.” He gives the worldling husks; but he stops
to find out the sweet fruits for his people. He gathers out the fruits from
among the leaves, that his people might have the best food, and enjoy the
richest pleasures. Oh! it is the satisfaction of God’s people to believe in this
exalting truth that he chooses their inheritance for them. But, since there
are many who dispute it, allow me just to stir up your minds by way of
remembrance, by mentioning certain facts which will lead you to see clearly
that verily God does choose our lot, and apportion for us our inheritance.
And, first, let me ask, must we not all of us admit an over-ruling
providence, and the appointment of Jehovah’s hands, as to the means
whereby we came into this world? These men who think that afterwards
we are left to our own free will by choosing this or the other to direct our
steps, must admit that our entrance into the world was not of our own will,
but that God there had his hand upon us. What circumstances were those
in our power which led us to elect a certain person to be our parent? Had
we anything to do with it? Did not God-of himself appoint our parents,
native place, and friends? Could he not have caused me to be born with the
skin of the Hottentot, brought forth by a filthy mother who should nurse
me in her “kraal,” and teach me to bow down to Pagan gods, quite as
easily as to have given me a pious mother, who should each morning and
night bend her knee in prayer on my behalf? Or, might he not, if he had
pleased, have given me some profligate to have been my parent, from
whose lips I might have early heard fearful, filthy, and obscene language?
Might he not have placed me where I should have had a drunken father,
who should have immured me in a very dungeon of ignorance, and brought
me up in the chains of crime? Was it not God’s providence that I had so
happy a lot, that both my parents were his children, and endeavored to
train me up in the fear of the Lord? To whom do any of you owe your
parentage -be it good, or be it bad? Is it not to be traced to the decree of
God? Did not his predestination put you where you were? Was it not the
Lord who appointed the place of your birth, and the hour thereof? Look
again at your bodies, do you not see the doings of God there? How many
children are born into the world deformed? How many come into it
deficient in some one or other of their faculties? But look at ourself. You
are perhaps comely in person, or if not, you have all your limbs; your bones
are well set, and you are strong — must you not trace this up to God? Do
you not see that he arranged the commencement of your life for you? You
might have opened your career there, or there, or there; but he placed you
there in that particular spot, without asking your leave. Did he turn to you
and say, O clay! in what shape shall I fashion you? Or, did he who begat
you ask you what you would be? No: he made you what he pleased, and if
you have now the possession of your faculties and limbs, you must
acknowledge and confess that there was the decree of God in it. And, still
further, how much of the finger of God must we discern in our temper and
constitution? I suppose no one will be foolish enough to say that we are all
born with the same natural temperament and constitution. I am sure there
are some persons who differ a great deal from others, at least I should like
to differ a little from them-some of those with whom you could not sit a
single moment without feeling that you would rather stand in a shower of
rain, and get dripping wet than sit on a sofa by their side; some persons are
so exceedingly warm in their tempers that they actually burn a hole in their
manners and conversation-they cannot speak without being cross, and testy
and angry. Now, although such persons often indulge their temper, yet we
must allow that, in some measure, they are excusable, because they can
trace it to the nature which their mother gave them, (as the worldly poet
would say) or rather, that temperament with which they were bore. As if
there should be others here who are naturally amiable-who have a kind
loving spirit-who are not so easily moved to wrath and passion; in whom
there is not so much of that absurd pride which makes man exalt himself
above his fellows: who has formed them aright or fashioned them so well?
Has not God done it and proved himself a Sovereign? And must we not see
in this that God in some way or other has fixed our destiny, from the very
fact that the opening bud of life is entirely in his hands? It does seem
rational that since God appointed the commencement of our existence,
there should be some evidence of his control in the future parts of it.
But now a second observation. I will ask any sensible man, above all, any
serious Christian here, whether there have not been certain times in his life
when he could most distinctly see that indeed God did “choose his
inheritance for him?” You are a young man-you are asked what will be
your pursuit: you choose such-and-such a thing. You are about to be
apprenticed to that peculiar trade-a misfortune happens-it cannot be done.
Without your consent, or will, you are placed in another position. Your
will was scarcely consulted; your parents exercised some authority, while
the hand of providence seemed to say to you, “it must be so” -and you
could not help yourself. Take another case: you had established a house of
business-suddenly there came a crushing misfortune which you no more
could avoid than an ant could stop an avalanche. You were driven from
your business, and now you occupy your present position because there
was nothing else to which you could betake yourself. Was not that the
hand of God? You cannot trace it to yourself; you were positively
compelled to change your plan; you were driven to it. Perhaps you once
had friends on whom you depended; you had no thought of launching out
into the world and being independent of the assistance of others. Suddenly,
by a stroke of providence, one friend dies; then another; then another; and,
without your own volition, you were placed in such circumstances that like
a leaf in the whirlpool, you were whirled round and round, and the
employment you now follow, or the engagement that now occupies you, is
not of your own choosing, but is that of God? I do not know whether all of
you can go with me here, but I think you must in some instance or other be
forced to see that God has indeed ordained your inheritance for you. If you
cannot, I can I can see a thousand chances, as men would call them, all
working together like wheels in a great piece of machinery, to fix me just
where I am, and I can look back to a hundred places where, if one of those
little wheels had run awry-if one of those little atoms in the great whirlpool
of my existence had started aside-I might have been anywhere but here,
occupying a very different position. If you cannot say this, I know I can
with emphasis, and can trace God’s hand back to the period of my birth
through every step I have taken; I can feel that indeed God has allotted my
inheritance for me. If any of you are so wilfully beclouded that you will not
see the hand of God in your being, and will insist that all has been done by
your will without providence: that you have been left to steer your own
course across the ocean of existence; and that you are where you are
because your own hand guided the tiller, and your own arm directed the
rudder, all I can say is, my own experience belies the fact, and the
experience of many now in this place would rise in testimony against you,
and say, “Verily, it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.”- “Man
proposes, but God disposes,” and the God of heaven is not unoccupied,
but is engaged in over-ruling, ordering, altering, working all things
according to the good pleasure of his will.

A third fact let me mention. If you turn to the pages of inspiration, and
read the lives of some of the most eminent saints, I think you will be
obliged to see the marks of God’s providence in their histories too plainly
to be mistaken Take, for instance, the life of Joseph. There is a young man
who from early life serves God. Read that life till its latest period when he
gave commandment concerning his bones, and you cannot help marvelling
at the wondrous dealings of providence. Did Joseph choose to be hated of
his brethren? But, yet, was not their envy a material circumstance in his
destiny? Did he choose to be put into the pit? But was not the putting into
the pit as necessary to his being made a king in Egypt as Pharaoh’s dream!
Did Joseph desire to be tempted of his mistress? He chose to reject the
temptation, but did he choose the trial? Nay, God sent it. Did he choose to
be put into the dungeon? No. And had he aught to do with the baker’s
dream, or with Pharaoh’s either? Can you not see, all the way through,
from first to last, even in the forgetfulness of the butler, who forget to
speak of Joseph till the appointed time came, when Pharaoh should want
an interpreter, that there was verily the hand of God? Joseph’s brethren did
just as they liked when they put him into the pit. Potiphar’s wife followed
the dictates of her own abandoned lust in tempting him. And yet,
notwithstanding all the freedom of their will, it was ordained of God, and
worked according together for one great end, to place Joseph on the
throne; for as he said himself, “Ye meant it for evil, but God intended it for
good, that he might save your souls alive! “There was the ordinance of
God’s Providence in it as clearly as there is light in the sun. Or take again
the life of such a man as Moses. I suppose no one will deny that there was
a Providence in his being placed in the ark, just in the particular spot where
Pharaoh’s daughter came to wash. And who will deny that it was a
providence that she should say, “Go and fetch me a woman to nurse this
child,” and his mother, Jochebed, should come to nurse him? I imagine that
no one would consider that there was an absence of Providence in the fact
that the child was comely, and that he grew in all the wisdom of Egypt, and
that he had a mind capacious enough to receive knowledge. Nor will you
deny the providence that led him to the side of Horeb’s mountain, or to
Jethro’s daughter, nor can you for an instant deny that there was a
providence which afterwards brought him before King Pharaoh, and helped
him all his way through. The man was a God’s-man. God seems to be
stamped upon his brow in all his acts; in all the three forties of his life,
whether the forty spent in the palace, the forty in the wilderness, or the
forty that he was king in Jeshurun. In all this there seems to be so
manifestly God overruling the man’s acts, that you cannot help saying,
“Here is the Almighty! here is the hand of God in everything the man
does!” and ye turn from the history of Moses, and say, “Truly God was in
this place though I knew it not.” I might refer you to the life of Daniel,
fraught with interest as it was, and in that book you would see how his
steps were first of all sadly guided to Babylon, by being carried captive;
and yet that from the degradation of his banishment there arises the
grandeur of Daniel’s visions, and Daniel’s character is displayed in all its
clearness, so that you must see that a wise hand was dealing with him, and
developing his virtues and his excellencies. More I shall not say here,
because I like you to refer to the Scripture yourselves. Scripture is the best
book of providence we have ever read. If any one should ask me for a
book of anecdotes illustrative of providence, I should refer him to the
Bible. There he might find the marvellous story of the woman who went
out into a distant country, and during her absence lost her inheritance. On a
certain day she went to the king to ask him for it, and just as she came
there Gehazi was telling the king concerning a woman whose son Elijah
had raised to life-and he said, “O, my Lord! this is the woman, and this is
the son!” There were Gehazi and the king talking on the subject, and the
woman came in just at the moment. And yet there are some fools who call
that a “chance.” Why, sirs, it is an appointment as clearly as anything could
be. And that is just one out of myriads of instances you could find in
Scripture, where you can see God present in the affairs of man.

But as the Bible, after all, is the best proof of any doctrine we can advance,
I beg to refer you to one or two texts therein: and first, let me ask you to
direct your attention to a passage in the Isaiah, 6,7, “I am the Lord and
there is none else. I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and
create evil; I the Lord do all these things.” Now here is a most direct
assertion of the power of God in everything: that he maketh peace, and
that he maketh evil-that he createth light and that he createth darkness. We
may ask as the prophet did of old, “Is there evil in the city and the Lord
hath not done it?” Even providential evil is to be ascribed to God; and in
some marvellous sense which we understand not and cannot comprehend,
the ordinance of God has even reference to the sins of men “He has made
even the wicked for the day of his wrath.” “The vessels of wrath fitted to
destruction even these shall show forth his praise. Good and evil in your
condition you must ever regard as the work of God. Whatever your
circumstances are this morning-are you sick, are you in poverty or are you
much troubled, the evil as well as the good is the work of God; and shall a
man receive good at the hands of the Lord, and shall he not in equal
patience receive evil? Will you not take everything from God which he is
pleased to give, seeing that he himself asserts “I create light I create
darkness; I make good and I make evil.” Turn now to a passage in Job
14:5. — “His days are determined, the number of his months are with thee,
thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass.” What a solemn
thought! God has “appointed our bounds.” One of the prophets says,

“Thou hast hedged up my way with thorns and made a wall so that I
cannot find my paths.” And that is first the truth in regard to man’s life.
The “bounds” of it are “appointed!” man only walks within these “bounds;”
out of these limits he cannot get. If this does not imply the hand of God in
everything I do not know what does. Turn now to a proverb from the wise
man-Proverbs 16:33.-”The lot is cast into the lap but the whole disposing
thereof is of the Lord.” And if the disposal of the lot is the Lord’s whose is
the arrangement of our whole life? You know when Achan had committed
a great sin the tribes were assembled and the lot fell upon Achan. When
Jonah was in the ship they cast lots and the lot fell upon Jonah. And when
Jonathan had tasted the honey they cast lots and Jonathan was taken. When
they cast lots for an apostle who should succeed the fallen Judas, the lot
fell upon Matthias, and he was separated to the work. The lot is directed of
God. And if the simple casting of a lot is guided by him how much more
the events of our entire life-especially when we are told by our blessed
Savior: “The very hairs of your head are all numbered: not a sparrow
falleth to the ground without your Father.” If it be so; if these hairs are
counted; if an inventory is written of each one of them; and if the existence
of each of these hairs is marked and mapped, how much more precious in
the sight of the Lord shall our lives be. Take one more passage in Jeremiah
21:25: “O Lord I know that the way of man is not in himself. It is not in
man that walketh to direct his steps.” Jeremiah said, “I know” and he was
an inspired man, and that satisfies us. “I know.” I have sometimes when
quoting a passage out of the apostle Paul been met by somebody replying
that; really they did not think Paul so great an authority as other Scripture
writers.” I was astonished at hearing of the following dialogue between
two young persons. One remarked “Mr. Spurgeon is too high in doctrine.”
Said her friend: “He is not higher than St. Paul.” “No” said she “But St.
Paul was not quite right according to my opinion.” I was very glad to sink
in the same boat as Paul for if Paul was not right in the view of poor pitiful
creatures, verily Spurgeon should not care. I would rather be wrong with
Paul than right with anybody else because Paul was inspired. But will they
cut out some of the Old Testament too? Will they dare to accuse Jeremiah
of mistake? Jeremiah says, “I know that the way of man is not in himself, it
is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.”

I may not have proved my point to any person who is an antagonist to this
doctrine: but to you who believe I do not doubt that I have somewhat
confirmed it. Let me say one word. Perhaps some who hear me will say,
“Then, sir in the case of Christians you make God the author of sin if you
believe that their lives were ordained of him!” I never said so! Prove that I
said it and then I will come before your bar and try to excuse myself. But
until you hear these lips say, that God is the author of sin go your way and
prove first of all what it means to speak the truth. I have not asserted any
such vile doctrine; but I will tell you who does say that God is the author
of sin-and that is the man who does not believe in natural depravity-that
man makes God the author of sin. I remember the case of a minister who
most fearfully split on this rock. When a child had been doing something
that was far from right a friend said, “See there brother, there is original sin
in the child; for at its early age see how it sins.” “No” said he, “it is only
certain powers God has placed in the child developing themselves; it is the
nature which God has given it originally it is one of God’s perfect
creatures.” These gentlemen make God the author of sin, because they
throw the nature upon God, whereas had we not fallen, every one of us
would have been born with a perfect nature; but since we have fallen,
anything good in us is the gift of God, and that which is evil springs
naturally from our parents, by carnal descent from Adam. I never said God
was the author of sin. I thank you, sir, take the accusation yourself:
II. And now having thus spoken upon the doctrine, we shall have a few
minutes concerning this as A PRAYER. “He shall choose our inheritance for
us.” Dry doctrine my friends is of little use. It is not the doctrine which
helps us it is our assent to the doctrine. And now I have been preaching
this morning concerning God’s ordaining our lives. Some do not like it, to
them the truth will be of no service. But there are some of you, who if it
were not the truth, would say you wish to have it so, for you would say, in
your prayer “Thou shalt choose my inheritance for me.”

First, “thou shalt choose my mercies for me.” You and I beloved often get
choosing our own mercies. God in his wisdom may have made one man
rich. “Ah!” says he, at night, “would God I had not all this wealth to tease
my mind and worry me. I believe any peasant who toils for me has far more
rest than I have.” Another who is a poor man wipes the hot sweat from his
brow, and says, “O my Father, I have asked thee to give me neither
poverty nor riches; but here am I so poor that I am obliged to toil
incessantly for my bread, would God I could have my mercies there among
the rich.” One has been born with abilities. He has improved them by
education, and this improvement of his natural powers has entailed upon
him fearful responsibilities, so that he has to exercise his thoughts and his
brain from morning till night. Sometimes he sits down and says, “Now if I
am not the most hard worked of all mortals. Those who keep a shop can
shut it up; but I am open it all times, and I am always under this
responsibility. What shall I do and how shall I rest myself?” Another who
has to toil with his hands is thinking, “Oh! if I could lead such a
gentlemanly life as that minister. He never has to work hard. He only has to
think and read, of course that is not hard work. He has perhaps to sit up till
twelve o’clock at night to prepare his sermon, that is not work of course. I
wish I had his situation.” So we all cry out about our mercies, and want to
choose our allotments. “Oh!” says one, “I have health, but I think I could
do without that if I had wealth.” Another says, “I have wealth, but I could
give all my gold to have good constitution.” One says, “Here am I stowed
away in this dirty London; I would give anything if I could go and live in
the country.” Another, who resides in the country, says, “There is no
convenience here, you have to go so many miles for the doctor, and one
thing and the other, I wish I dwelt in London.” So that we are none of us
satisfied with our mercies. But the true Christian says, or ought to say,
“Thou shalt choose my inheritance for me;” high or low, rich or poor, town
or country, wealth or poverty, ability or ignorance, “Thou shalt choose my
inheritance for me.”

Again, we must leave to God the choice of our employment. “Oh!” says
the preacher-and I have been wicked enough to say so myself — “how
would I like to have all my employment in the week that I might sit in the
pew on the Sabbath and hear a sermon, and be refreshed?” I am sure I
should be glad to hear a sermon; it is a long time since I heard one. But
when I do attend one, it always tires me-I want to be improving on it. How
would I like to sit down and have a little of the feast in God’s house
myself, instead of always being the serving man in God’s household. Thank
God! I can steal a crumb for myself sometimes. But then we fancy, O that I
were not in that employment! O that like Jonah we might flee to Tarshish,
to avoid going to that great Nineveh. Another is a Sabbath-school teacher.
He says, “I would rather visit the sick than sit with those troublesome boys
and girls. And then the teachers do not seem to be so friendly with me as
they should be.” The Sunday-school teacher thinks he can do anything
better than teach; but there is his friend who visits the sick coming down
the stairs, and he says, “I could teach little children, or preach a little; but
really I cannot visit the sick. There is nothing so hard, and that requires so
much self-denial.” Another says, “I am a tract distributor. It is not easy
work to have your tracts refused at this door, and then at another; and
persons looking at you as if you came to rob them; could stand up before
the congregation and speak, but I cannot do this.” And so we get selecting
our employments. Ah! but we ought to say, “Thou shalt choose my
inheritance for me;” and leave our employment to God. “If there were two
angels in heaven,” said a good man, “supposing there were two works to
be done, and one work was to rule a city, and the other to sweep a street
crossing -the angels would not stop a moment to say which they would do.
They would do which ever God told them to do. Gabriel would shoulder
his broom and sweep the crossing cheerfully, and Michael would not be a
bit prouder in taking the scepter to govern the city.” So with a Christian.
But there is nothing that we oftener want to choose than our crosses. None
of us like crosses at all; but all of us think everybody else’s trials lighter
than our own. Crosses we must have; but we often want to be choosing
them. “Oh!” says one, “my trouble is in my family. It is the worst cross in
the world-my business is successful; but if I might have a cross in my
business, and get rid of this cross in my family, I should not mind.” Then,
my beloved hearers, in reference to your mercies, your employments, and
your afflictions, say-”Lord, thou shalt choose my inheritance for me! I have
been a silly child; I have often tried to meddle with my lot. Now I leave it. I
cast myself on the stream of Providence, hoping to float along. I give
myself up to the influence of thy will.” He that kicks and struggles in the
water, they say, will be sure to sink; but he who lies still will float-so with
Providence. He that struggles against it goes down; but he who resigns
everything to it, will float along quietly calmly, and happily.

Having thus spoken upon the extent of the surrender very briefly, I might
hint at the wisdom of it, and show you it is not only good for you to offer
this prayer, but it is better for you, than to control yourself. I might tell you
that it is good for you to give yourself up to God’s hands, because he
understands your wants, he knows your case and he will so pity your
necessities that he will give you the best supplies. It is better for you then if
you trusted in yourself, for if you had the choosing of your troubles, or
your employments, you would always have this bitter thought, “Now, I
chose it myself, and therefore I must blame my own folly.”

But now another thought. What was the cause of the Psalmist saying this?
How came he to be able to feel it? for there are few Christians who can
really affirm it and stand to it: “Thou shalt choose my inheritance for me.” I
think the cause is to be found in this, that he had a true experience of
God’s wisdom. Poor David could indeed thank God for having chosen his
inheritance for him, for he had given him a very goodly one. He had put
him in a king’s mansion; he had made him conqueror over Goliath, and had
raised him to be ruler over a great people. David, by a practical experience,
could say, “Thou shalt choose my inheritance for me.” Some of you cannot
say it, can you? What is the reason? because you have never witnessed
Divine guidance, you have never looked to see the hand that supplies your
mercies. Some of us who have seen that hand in a few instances are obliged
to say from the very force of circumstances,

“Here I raise my Ebenezer.”

Then, again-

“Hither by thy help I’ve come.”

I hope and trust in that same good pleasure which has guided me hitherto,
that it will bring me safely home.

Again, it was a true faith that made the Psalmist say he relied upon God.
He knew him to be worthy of his trust, so he said, “Thou shalt choose my
inheritance for me.” And, again, it was true love, for love can trustaffection
can put confidence in the one it loves; and since David loved his
God, he took the unwritten roll of his life, and he said, “Write what thou
wilt, my Lord.” “Thou shalt choose my inheritance for me.”

I might finish, if I had time, by telling you the good effects that this
produced upon the Psalmist’s mind, and what it would produce upon
yours; how it would bring a holy calm continually if you were always to
pray this prayer; and how it would so relieve your mind from anxiety, that
you would be better able to walk as a Christian should. For when a man is
anxious he cannot pray; when he is troubled about the world he cannot
serve his Master, he is serving himself. If you could “seek first the kingdom
of God and his righteousness,” beloved, “all things would then be added to
you.” What a noble Christian you would be; how much more honorable
you would be to Christ’s religion; and how much better you could serve
him.

And now you who have been meddling with Christ’s business, I have been
preaching this to you. You know you sometimes sing-

“Tis mine to obey, ‘tis his to provide,”

but then you have been meddling with Christ’s business, you have been
leaving your own; you have been trying the “providing” pert and leaving
the “obeying?” to somebody else. Now, you take the obeying part, and let
Christ manage the providing. Come then, brethren, doubting and fearful
ones, come and see your father’s storehouse, and ask whether he will let
you starve while he has stored away such plenty in his garner! Come and
look at his heart of mercy, see if that will ever fail! Come and look at his
inscrutable wisdom and see if that will ever go amiss: Above all, look up
there to Jesus Christ your intercessor, and ask yourself, “while he pleads,
can my Father forget me?” And if he remembers even sparrows, will he
forget one of the least of his poor children? “Cast thy burden upon the
Lord and he will sustain thee,” “He will never suffer the righteous to be
moved.”

This I have preached to God’s children: and now one word to the other
portion of this crowded assembly. The other day there was a very singular
scene in the House of Commons. There is a certain enclosure there set
apart for the members; into this place a gentleman ignorantly strayed. Byand-
bye some one raised the cry “A stranger in the house!” The sergeant of
the House went up to him, took him by the shoulder and reminded him that
he had no business there-not being a member-not one of the elect-not
having been elected by the country. The man of course looked very foolish.
But, as he had made a mistake, he was let go. Had he wilfully strayed
within the enclosure, and taken a seat he might not have got off so easily.
When I saw that, I thought, “A stranger in the House!” This morning is
there not a stranger in the house? There are some here who are strangers
to the subject we have been discussing-strangers to God-strangers to true
religion. “There’s a stranger in the house.” It led me to think of that great
“assembly and Church of the first-born, whose names are written in
heaven;” and I thought of the people who, last Sabbath night, sat down to
the Lord’s table to partake of the Sacrament; and the idea struck me,
“There’s a stranger in the house.” Now, in the House of Commons, a
stranger cannot sit five minutes without being detected, for all eyes are so
soon fixed upon him; but in Christ’s Church-in this church-a stranger can
sit in the house without being found out. Ah! there are strangers sitting
here, looking as religious as other people: some that are not children, some
that are not chosen some that are not heirs of God. They are “strangers in
the house.” Shall I tell you what will happen by-and-bye? Though I cannot
detect you under the cloak of you profession; though God’s people may
not find you out, the grim “sergeant of the house “is coming-Death is
coming-and he will discover you! What will be the penalty of your
intrusion, as a professor, into Christ’s Church? What will be your lot if you
have been a stranger in his house below, when you find that, though you
may have sat for a little while in this House of Commons below, you
cannot sit in the House of Lords above? What will be your lot when it shall
be said, “Depart ye accused?” And you may exclaim “Lord! Lord! have we
not eaten and drunk in thy presence, and taught in thy streets?” And yet he
will say, “Verily, I never knew you!” “You are a stranger in the house!”-
”Depart, accursed one!” How can I tell who is a stranger in these pews,
and who are strangers upstairs? Some of us are not strangers! “We are no
more strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints and of the
household of God.” To such of you as are strangers, I pray you think of it,
and go to Christ’s throne, and beg of him that yet you may be his children,
and numbered with his people. Then, after that, I will talk with you about
my text, but not now. Then I will bid you pray to God, “Thou shalt choose
my inheritance for me.”

Bishops could be banished from the House of Lords under plans being considered by Gordon Brown.

The Prime Minister is looking at blueprints for a new and radically reformed upper chamber of parliament as part of his programme of constitutional reform.

Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, will publish a paper on plans for Lords reform before the Commons rises for its summer break next month.

One option under consideration is a move towards an all-elected upper house. In the new, elected House of Lords, there would be no seats reserved for Church of England bishops or any other religious leaders.

A less radical option being discussed is for an 80 per cent elected Lords, with the remaining seats reserved for appointed members and others such as the bishops.

Advocates of the 80 per cent option say it would allow the Lords to retain the expertise of some of the distinguished academics, scientists, lawyers, medics, economists and generals who now sit as life peers.

A partially-elected Lords would also be more likely to win support from the Conservatives. David Cameron has recently signalled his willingness to support an upper house where two-thirds of members were directly elected.

The 26 bishops, known as the Lords Spiritual, sit in the House of Lords because of the Church of England’s position as the Established church.

Some constitutional reformers believe that removing them from the Lords would be the first step on the path to disestablishment.

Mr Brown earlier this year signalled his willingness to make changes to some of the fundamentals of the British constitution, including the monarchy.

He has discussed with the Queen the possibility of altering the Act of Settlement and other related laws, to allow female heirs and Roman Catholics to take the throne. The issue will be discussed at a Commonwealth leaders’ summit November.

Oh Great!!

A bit of good news for once

NEWCASTLE, U.K., June 22, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Baby Grace Vincent, a U.K. baby who was diagnosed with meningitis at six weeks, has miraculously survived after her life-support system was turned off.

Baby Grace was born without complications on April 3 to Emily Ashurst, 26, and her partner, Pete Vincent, 26. Vincent, a marine, had just returned from service in Afghanistan when, on May 16, Ashurst found Grace in a state of distress, covered with the purple patches characteristic of meningitis.

She was diagnosed with late-onset Group B Streptococcus (GBS), a bacteria present in almost a quarter of women, which can be passed on to babies during labor. GBS can normally be discovered prior to labor and its transmission prevented with antibiotics.

Describing the incident, Ashurst said, “Within hours she got poorly. We watched her stop breathing. We watched them put an oxygen mask on her face.”

After four days, Grace had suffered what was described as “catastrophic brain damage.”

“It was a bleak picture,” said Ashurst. “The doctors said they’d never seen a girl as poorly as Grace.”

“We came to the decision to switch off the machine. …She was baptized and all the family came to say goodbye.”

“Pete and I wanted to say goodbye on our own,” Ashurst continued, “and we were told she might gasp for air before she died. They put her in my arms before they disconnected her. We waited for her last breath.”

But miraculously, she never stopped breathing. About two weeks ago she was transferred, and doctors still expected she would die. Instead baby Grace stabilized and on Friday was sent home.

“Her breathing has stabilized,” Ms. Ashurst said, “showing that her brain stem is not damaged. She has opened one eye but is still blind. Her pupils have begun dilating back to their normal size. I think it is miraculous given the experience of five weeks ago.”

“We don’t look too far into the future and we are guided by Grace day by day. What she is doing now is amazing. Everyone has been calling her Amazing Grace.”

The BBC supports Islam and attacks Christianity, according to Don Maclean, the former Radio 2 religious programme presenter.

Maclean, who hosted Good Morning Sunday for 16 years, claimed that the corporation is biased against Christianity and had embarked on a movement to “secularise the country”.

“They’re keen on Islam, they’re keen on programmes that attack the Christian church,” he said.

Maclean, who was replaced on the Radio 2 show in 2006 by Aled Jones, said: “I know there are things that need to be brought forward, but you don’t see any programmes on Anglicanism that don’t talk about homosexual clergy and you don’t see anything on Roman Catholicism that don’t talk about paedophiles.

“They seem to take the negative angle every time. They don’t do that if they’re doing programmes on Islam. Programmes on Islam are always supportive”

The presenter, who also presented BBC children’s show Crackerjack in the 1970s, added: “I think there’s a secularist movement in this country to get rid of Christianity. Something must be done.”

He expressed concerns that the BBC had appointed Aaqil Ahmed as its new head of religious programmes. A document published on Monday said that the appointment of a Muslim in the role was a “worrying” development that could undermine corporation’s coverage of Christianity. The document accompanies a proposed motion to the General Synod of the Church of England. Members will have an opportunity to sign up to the motion in July.

A BBC spokesman said: “As the majority UK faith Christians remain central to the BBC’s religious programming. Songs of Praise celebrates Christianity every Sunday, we’re showing a major series on the history of Christianity later this year and Good Morning Sunday, Worship, the Daily Service and Choral Evensong are among our most popular regular religious programmes on our radio networks.”

Origonal Source The Telegraph

Nearly two thirds of teenagers don’t believe in God, according to a study by Penguin books.

Teenagers even say family, friends, money, music and even reality television are more important than religion.

It also emerged six out of ten 10 children (59 per cent) believe that religion “has a negative influence on the world”.

The survey also shows that half of teenagers have never prayed and 16 per cent have never been to church.

The study of 1,000 teenagers aged 13 to 18 was carried out by Penguin to mark this week’s publication of controversial novel ‘Killing God’ by Kevin Brooks.

The book is about a 15-year-old girl who questions the existence of God.

Kevin Brooks, the author, said: “I can’t say I am surprised by the teenagers’ responses.

“Part of the reason that I wrote Killing God was that I wanted to explore the personal attitudes of young people today, especially those with troubled lives, towards organised religion and the traditional concept of God.

“How can the moralities of an ancient religion relate to the tragedies and disorders of today’s broken world? And why do some people turn to God for help while others take comfort in drugs and alcohol?

“These are just some of the questions I wanted to consider… And I wasn’t looking for answers.”

The research also found 55 per cent of young people are not bothered about religion and 60 per cent only go to church for a wedding or christening.

Only three out of 10 teenagers believe in an afterlife and 41 per cent believe that nothing happens to your body when you die, but one in 10 reckon they come back as an animal or another human being.

A Church of England spokesman said: “Many teenagers aren’t sure what they believe at that stage of their lives, as is clear from the number who said they don’t know whether they believe in God.

“On the other hand many of these results point to the great spirituality of young people today that the Church is seeking to respond to through new forms of worship alongside tradition ones.”

Hanne Stinson, chief executive of The British Humanist Association, said: “It confirms that young people – like adults – do not need a religion to have positive values.

“The ‘golden rule’, which is often claimed by religions as a religious value, is in reality a shared human value – shared by all the major religions and the non-religious and almost every culture – that predates all the major world religions.”

Origonal Source The Telegraph

Public sector workers who face a conflict between their job and their faith should get another career, an MP scrutinising the Equality Bill says.

Lynne Featherstone MP said the world is not big enough to allow people to abide by their religious beliefs and conscience in the public sector workplace.

She said: “On the execution of public duty, it is important that we make it clear here and now that carrying out public services cannot be a matter of conscience.”

The Lib Dem MP for Hornsey and Wood Green was writing on her blog discussing her participation in the 9th and 10th sittings of the Equality Bill Committee.

She referred to amendments tabled by John Mason MP which aim to protect employees who are being asked to perform tasks which conflict with their religious beliefs.

She said: “John Mason’s argument was that the world was a big enough place to allow people to abide by their religious beliefs and conscience and employers could work around that.

“I totally disagree.”

She added: “if there are elements of the job that you cannot do in all conscience – then it isn’t the job for you.”

She referred to the case of Lillian Ladele, the Christian registrar who faces dismissal at Islington Council unless she agrees to perform same-sex civil partnership registrations.

Over the weekend it emerged that a second Christian registrar at Islington, Theresa Davies, has also been punished because she has the same view as Miss Ladele.

Islington Council has admitted that it has been able to provide a “first class” civil partnership service using its team of registrars without requiring Christian staff to be involved.

Despite this, Islington is pressing the two Christian registrars to act against their religious conscience or face the consequences.

Earlier this month a Sunday Telegraph poll showed that thousands of Christians are losing out on promotions and being hassled at work because of their beliefs.

More than half of the Christians surveyed said they had suffered some form of persecution for being a Christian.

Since the turn of the year a number of public sector staff have been punished by their bosses for expressing their faith in the workplace.

NHS nurse, Caroline Petrie, was suspended because she offered to pray for a patient.

Mum and part-time school receptionist, Jennie Cain, was disciplined because she emailed friends asking them to pray about an incident at school involving her daughter.

A Christian foster carer was struck off because she allowed a Muslim child in her care to convert to Christianity.

Teacher, Kwabena Peat, was suspended after he complained that a staff training day was used to marginalise those who disagreed with homosexual practice.

David Booker, a charity worker in Southampton, was suspended under ‘diversity’ rules after answering a colleague’s questions about his Christian beliefs on sexual ethics.

Duke Amachree, a council worker, was also suspended from his job for encouraging a terminally ill woman to turn to God. Bosses told him that even saying “God bless” at work was unacceptable.

Mr Anand Rao, a Christian nurse with 40 years experience, was sacked because he said during a training course that going to church could ease the anxiety of a stressed patient.

The Equality Bill is a huge piece of legislation which aims to consolidate years of equality laws into one Act of Parliament.

Christian groups are concerned about proposals to narrow existing exemptions that allow them to act in keeping with their religious ethos.

The Bill also proposes to place a positive duty on public bodies like schools and the police to actively promote gay and transsexual rights.

Source The Christian Institute

Scary Stuff from the Christian Institute:-