eChurch Blog

Bill Muehlenberg

If you knew the world was going to end in one week, would you do anything different? I recently posted a question quite similar to that on a social networking website. I received only two responses: one person said ‘yes’ while the other one said ‘no’.

It seems this question should be of relevance for everyone, but it would hold special significance for those who are Christians. A basic doctrine of Christianity is the second coming of Jesus Christ. Just as Christ has come once to earth, he will come again, and when he does, he will bring about the final elements of the divine calendar.

Known as “the blessed hope” (Titus 2:13), this key teaching should be embraced by all believers, even though there are plenty of disagreements over the fine details of the matter. Indeed, there has been plenty of debate about how exactly the end of all things is to be understood.

But however we envisage these events to occur, it still remains a powerful biblical truth which should be seen as more than a mere item of curiosity and speculation about the future. It should be a motivated factor in our lives. Indeed, in one lengthy discussion of the topic, the apostle Peter uses it to encourage us in holy living. In 2 Peter 3 he uses the truth of the Day of the Lord as a spur to godly and holy living.

Instead of sitting around arguing about theories of the millennium, or whether we await a secret rapture of believers, we need to be living lives worthy of his return. And while each generation of Christians has been tempted to set dates, and has expected their age to be the last, we need to get on with the business of God’s business.

Jesus said “Occupy till I come” (Luke 19:13, KJV). That is, we are to keep busy with the work of the kingdom until he does return. This is not the time to pack our bags, put up our feet, and await his return. There is much work to do, and we have no sure word of when his exact coming will be.

I suppose I have been thinking about this a bit more lately, since I just recently saw another whiz-bang end-of-the-world action movie. Complete with massive special effects and heaps of cataclysmic destruction and mayhem, it is yet another in a long line of doomsday and Armageddon films.

I refer to the latest Hollywood blockbuster, 2012. As you might know, it involves the destruction of the world in December 21, 2012. This is not just a date picked out of the hat by an overzealous Hollywood filmmaker. It is unfortunately becoming our next Y2K. Simply Google that date and see the 17 million hits which come up.

Evidently the Mayan calendar puts it as the end of the world, and all sorts of apocalyptic types are gearing up for this next best thing in doomsday scenarios.  As we get closer to this date, expect the madness and mayhem to increase.

But of course for the Christian we should have no such fears and concerns. We know that God is in charge of history, and the universe is fully and safely in his hands until the appointed time when Jesus does return and a new heaven and a new earth are created.

But this movie does raise some points which are worth reflecting on, as do all such films in this genre. One thing that comes to mind is that fortunately this film does not suggest the end of all things is due to human activity. It is increased solar activity which in fact triggers the chaos and carnage.

Thus those true believers in AGW (anthropogenic global warming – that is, manmade causes to climate change) will be disappointed with this film. The matter is entirely outside of the hands of men, and is caused solely by natural forces, in this case, a rather agitated sun.

Another issue raised in the film (and I need to be careful not to give too much away here, in case you plan on seeing the film) involves the creation of massive arks which will save a lucky remnant of mankind. A number of these super arks are developed to ensure that mankind survives, and can start over again in creating human civilisation.

But whenever a select few are chosen to perpetuate the species, one has to ask some hard questions: Who gets selected? And why? And who does the selecting? How do we know who is worth preserving and who is not?

In the film all the usual suspects are chosen: political leaders, scientists, artisans, and experts in various fields. And it seems that those who are wealthy enough to buy themselves a place on the arks are also included. A semester-long course in ethics would be needed to fully explore some of these issues.

Another issue raised by the movie goes back to my opening paragraph. Suppose you knew the world as we know it was coming to an end in, say, two months. Would that make any difference to the way you live? Christians as well as non-Christians would both presumably make quite a few serious adjustments to their lives, if they knew the gig was up in just a few short weeks.

This is of course teased out in the film in various ways. For example, in one scene there is a father desperately trying to call his estranged son who he has not spoken to for some years. Just when the son is contacted, he dies in the conflagration. The father had waited too long. He should never have put off such an important thing as reconciliation with own his son.

A bit of pending apocalyptic is always good to focus the mind and sort out our priorities. Indeed, when it comes to human relationships, we always should live as if the next day might be our last. We should never put off taking those difficult but necessary steps in getting right with those we have wronged, or have wronged us.

We should never put off till tomorrow those things which ought to be said today, including simple and basic things like “I love you” to family members and loved ones. The Bible of course speaks much about making sure we are reconciled with our brothers, and keeping close accounts with one another.

So films like this raise all sorts of issues. If you are a believer in Jesus Christ you will of course reject much in these doomsday scenarios. We need not fear, and we need not get carried away with wild end-times speculation. We have a sovereign God who is fully in charge of the course of history, and this world will last as long as it is intended too.

The wise way to live as a Christian is to concentrate on doing the will of the Father, whatever that might be. It may mean devoting the next eight to twelve years to obtain higher degrees, so that you might more effectively serve our Lord in coming decades.

It might mean taking the long and arduous steps of training to be an effective cross-culture missionary. Find out what God wants you to do, and then do it with all your heart, even if it means many years of preparation and training.

However, when it comes to our relationship with our Lord, and with others, it may be wise to live as if Christ were coming back next week. If he were, how much would you change in your relationship with God? How much would you change in your relationship with others?

Such questions are worth thinking about now, and should not be put off into the hazy future. We should be living with eternity in our hearts. We should live as if Christ could return at any moment, but we should also be prepared to dig in for the long haul should the Lord tarry.

As I have recently been slated, as part of an un-Christian Zionist conspiracy, here is some balance for you.

I have been notified that an elderly churchwarden has been asked to resign his position, after it became apparent that he was a fully paid up member of the BNP.

I’m not going to get dragged in to the rights and wrongs of the BNP, but I will say this. What right have church leaders to dictate to members, which legal political party they may or may not belong to?

Frankly, when you scratch beneath the surface of any political party, it doesn’t look too pretty. Perhaps a more even handed approach would be to chastise anyone who belongs to any legal political party?

Don’t think that I am naive. I know what the BNP believe and what underlies their ideology, but that is not my point. They are currently a legal political entity (whether folks like it or not) who took just under a million votes fairly recently.

I wouldn’t mind so much, but it seems to me that the Church of England ‘elite’ is constantly engaged in grubby politics of one sort or the other.

Perhaps I believe that being associated with the Labour party is not compatible with a Christian faith.

This is the article from the BNP, make what you will of it.

The “Church of Political Correctness” Crucifies its First Martyr

The Church of England General Synod’s campaign against BNP members has claimed its first martyr in the form of an elderly churchwarden, who has been bullied into resigning after church leaders deemed that his membership of the BNP was “incompatible” with Christianity!  David North from Frisby-on-the-Wreake near Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire resigned three weeks ago.

Mr. North said, “For 60 years I have worked hard for Frisby Church. When I was 8 years old my job was to pump the organ in church services and help lay out the carpets before each service. Over the years I have helped raise thousands of pounds for the church in different projects. I have been the churchwarden for over 15 years in two stints and I find it deeply hurtful to be asked to resign having done nothing illegal – it hurts”.

Mr. North’s son James, a local councillor for the BNP said, “I feel very upset by this decision. The church was a big part of my father’s life and I feel let down by this decision, my family have always lived in Frisby and supported the church but sadly history always has a way of repeating itself. My grandmother when she was a child was not allowed to attend Sunday school and her parents were told they were not welcome in the village church due to the fact that they were not married at a time when this was deemed “incompatible” with Christianity. They were forced to become Methodists because of this but as attitudes changed they did finally return to the church. I believe we will see a similar story here.”

A spokeswoman for the Diocese of Leicester said, “It was pointed out to Mr. North that membership of the BNP is incompatible with being a practising Christian [sic]. This is the Bishop’s complete stance on it. The pastor is not able to kick out a churchwarden but it can be pointed out that he must make a choice between the BNP and the Church. Members of the congregation can be a member of the BNP but he held an office in the church and was representing us both legally and professionally.”

Now British Nationalists do not presume to claim that Jesus Christ would necessarily endorse their political cause, or indeed, that of any other modern political movement or party.   But we do assert most vigorously that Jesus Christ would have set his face resolutely against the political hounding of individual BNP members, and firmly believe that He would have condemned the Church of England’s active participation in that persecution.

Not even the most bigoted and benighted bishop can surely delude himself that he does Christ’s work when he allows his church to bully and hound an elderly fellow Christian from his beloved occupation?  Recent court judgements almost certainly mean that the Diocese of Leicester’s actions were unlawful; they were unquestionably reprehensible, immoral and un-Christian.

Few Church of England bishops retain any vestige of Christian faith these days, but most have now adopted instead an unshakeable belief in the new creed of political correctness.   In all their self-righteous moral rectitude, in their lack of humble self-doubt, in their smug intolerance, these bishops are surely the Levites and Pharisees of our day, walking by with their noses in the air, while the battered British people lie in the gutter.  In this apt parable, it is BNP activists who are the new Samaritans, reviled and persecuted outsiders who are prepared to roll their sleeves up and risk everything for a selfless good cause.

Irrepressibly vocal in eulogising the delights of Sharia, or fulminating against the BNP, the leaders of the Church of England maintain a strange trappist silence while Christian congregations are ethnically cleansed away and Christian graves are grubbed up in the grounds of churches converted to mosques.

It was no surprise then, that last month a group of clergy announced that they were contemplating a move to Rome on the grounds that, “The Church of England is, in the view of many of us, ceasing to be the church of Jesus Christ and becoming the church of political correctness.”

There are few situations which call for the language of harsh condemnation, but the persecution of Christian nationalists by supposedly Christian bishops is one such case.   As a corporate body, the Church of England Bishops are a disgrace to their country, their faith and their pious flock. They have betrayed all the Christian values their predecessors held dear. They have carelessly resigned their privilege of moral leadership. And worst of all, by persecuting Christian nationalists in flagrant breach of Christian principles, the bishops have self-consciously reincarnated the evil spirit of the Inquisition.

Those bishops who still believe in the Christian God would do well to fear His judgement.

Cross post from the Rosh Pina Project by Yeze

Looks like religious hardliners in Israel are mirroring the hatred often directed towards Israelis expressed through boycott campaigns.

Sometimes, these bigots call for boycotts of musicians playing in Israel, as seen in the calls for Paul McCartney and Leonard Cohen to boycott Israel.

Now bigots are calling for boycotts of Messianic musicians playing within Israel.

JewishIsrael reports:

Recently joint efforts on the part of Rabbi Mottle Wolf of Isralight, Ari Abramowitz of A7 radio, Yehuda HaKohen of the Zionist Freedom Alliance, and Jewish Israel, were able to prevent a known messianic missionary musician from performing in a popular pub café in central Jerusalem. Heck, he dresses Jewish and introduced himself as a Jew to the proprietors…so how were they to know?

Stopping a Messianic musician from playing a concert isn’t going to achieve anything, it’s merely an expression of hatred and contempt. It will be interesting to see whether pro-Israel anti-boycott groups will speak out against this injustice.

By Michael Fitzgerald – Boston Globe

What makes economies grow? It’s a question that has occupied thinkers for centuries. Most of us would tick off things like education levels, openness to trade, natural resources, and political systems.

Here’s one you might not have considered: hell.

On a larger scale, religious denominations affect economics by creating bonds of trust and shared commitment among small groups, both necessary qualities for lending and trade. In the Middle Ages, studies show, monk-run estates outperformed those that used serfs, thanks to religiously inspired cooperation and frugality. The Quakers of 18th-century Britain, renowned for their scrupulous honesty, came to dominate British finance. Ultra-orthodox Jews similarly dominate New York’s diamond trade because of levels of trust based on religion. Modern religious kibbutzim on average outperform their secular rivals, in part because of trust built through engaging in communal religious rituals.

But the ways that religions can influence entire economies – and the extent to which they do – are less clear. In 1905, Max Weber, a German sociologist who studied religions, identified what he called “the Protestant work ethic” as the driving force behind modern capitalism in the West. But by the middle of the 20th century, most sociologists had dismissed Weber’s thesis as based on bad theology and bad statistics. Modern economists haven’t looked much at the question, in part because it’s difficult to quantify something like religious belief, or to compare statistics on religious beliefs across countries. Scientists also find it hard to prove that religion, or any aspect of culture, causes economic behaviors.

But over the last several decades, better sets of statistics on religion have become available, and improvements in computing power and mathematical techniques have made it easier for economists to run very large statistical analyses, with hundreds of variables.

After Barro and McCleary’s initial work was published in 2003, other economists started looking more seriously at the impact of religious beliefs. Researchers based at the New University of Lisbon and the University of Illinois used a model that showed European industrial development between 1645 and 1850 took place roughly 35 years earlier in Protestant countries than Catholic ones. (The researchers posited that Protestant beliefs in economic success as a sign one might get to heaven inspired people to work harder and invest.) The German economist Sascha O. Becker looked at Prussia’s economic development and found that, at least for Germany, Weber was right about the Protestant work ethic: Protestants were more likely to be entrepreneurs than Catholics, and more likely to create bigger firms. (Becker argues the cause isn’t religious belief itself, but an accidental offshoot of Protestants needing to be literate enough to read the Bible.)

Belief’s influence on our economic behavior might even reflect biology. The special motivational power of hell, for instance, may lie deep in the human psyche. Ara Norenzayan, a psychologist at the University of British Columbia, and his graduate student Azim Shariff set up an experiment that would make it easy for people to cheat on a difficult math test. They found that people who believed in an omniscient, vengeful God typically chose short-term suffering – that is, facing the test without the crutch of cheating – over possible eternal suffering. “Those who believed in a punishing God cheated less,” Norenzayan said in an e-mail. He considers his findings to be consistent with Barro and McCleary’s research.

Michael Fitzgerald is a freelance writer in Millis. He researched this while a Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellow.

By Hilary White

ROME, November 16, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The news about abortion, marriage, divorce and the birth rate in Europe is bad and only getting worse, a report recently presented to the EU said.

According to the report by Norway’s Institute for Family Policies abortion rates in Britain have leaped by a third among unmarried teenage girls and abortion is helping to age the population of Europe. Without a massive shift to family-friendly policies, the pattern of increased abortion and increasingly aging population will inevitably lead to the collapse of social welfare benefits, and, ultimately, to the bankruptcy of Europe’s cradle-to-grave socialist welfare state.

Presented to the European Parliament on Wednesday, the report said that the situation of the family in Europe is “a desolate panorama.”

“Europe is plunged in an unprecedented demographic winter and has become an elderly continent, with a large birth deficit, fewer marriages and more of them broken, homes emptying.”

“The aging population, critical birth-rate, escalating abortions, the collapse of marriage, the explosion in family breakups and the emptying of homes are the main problems of Europeans,” the 2009 Report on the Evolution of the Family in Europe said.

The study found that the annual number of abortions in the EU equals the entire combined population of its ten smallest member states, with the three top aborting countries being Britain, France and Romania. In Europe there is one abortion every 25 seconds, for a total of more than 1,200,000 abortions a year. 19 percent of all European pregnancies end in abortion and 28 million children have been killed by abortion since 1990, making abortion the main cause of death in Europe.

The population over 65 years in all European states already exceeds the population under 14 years. The EU under 14 population has fallen from 89 million in 1993 to 78.4 million in 2008. Over-65s have risen from 68.3 million in 1993 to 84.9 million in 2008 – an increase of 16.5 million elderly people. The average age of EU citizens is 40.3 years, with Italy and Germany having the highest populations of elderly people.

The dropping European birth rate, the report says, with its concomitant increasing health and pension costs, will lead to increases in public expenditure to care for the aging population and the eventual collapse of public revenues, leading finally to the bankruptcy of the welfare state. The average birth rate of EU countries is now 1.38 per woman, well below the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman, even in relatively fertile countries like France.

Without a significant shift in family policies in all EU countries, the report predicts the result will be “catastrophic.” Starting in 2010, the population of Europe overall will begin to fall from 499 million to 472 million by 2050 and every third inhabitant will be over 65.

According to the study, Britain is the “abortion capital of Europe” with rates that last year pulled ahead of France. Its abortion rate is fifth in the world, behind Russia, the U.S., India and Japan. Among these countries, Britain can least afford such a high rate, with a population less than half that of Russia and Japan, a fifth that of the US, and 1/19 that of India. The median age of women in Britain is also rising, at 41.3 years, making recovery even more difficult.

The population of the 27 EU nations reached 500 million last year with most increases in population (78 per cent) attributable to immigration, not births. The natural increase of Europe’s population is 12 times lower than the US. Spain has immigration 9 times greater than its internal birth increase and Italy’s native population fell (-0.14 million) and had 23 times more immigrants than births (+3.28 million). Poland, Romania and Bulgaria are losing citizens by emigration and Lithuania, Latvia, Romania and Bulgaria have falling populations due to low immigration rates.

Only France, Holland, Finland and Slovakia have internal rates of population increase higher than their immigration figures.

Other indicators show the number of marriages, especially first marriages, is down and divorce rates are up. There are 1 in 4 fewer marriages than in 1980 and the marriage rate has fallen in 9 out 10 countries. One out of every 3 children (36.5 per cent) is born outside marriage. In some countries the fall in marriage rate has been around 50 per cent since 1983 and there are over one million divorces a year, the equivalent to one marital breakdown every 30 seconds.

More people (55 million) are living alone than ever before. One in four households in Europe has a single dweller and two out of three households have no children. Of the households with children, 50 per cent have only one child.

The report recommends the creation of a European Union ministry of the family, laws to increase flexibility of working hours to accommodate families, increases in tax benefits for families and an emphasis on family welfare programs over welfare for individuals.

It calls for governments to recognize the rights of families, including the right of parents to reconcile work and family life; to have the number of children they want; to choose the type of education their children receive and the right of children to live in a stable home.

From the brilltant EZGToons (with kind permission)

Previous related posts:-

The Government is being urged by a group of powerful MPs to axe references to Christianity from the constitutions of Britain’s far-flung outposts because they could undermine homosexual rights in these territories.

UK MPs want God-fearing remnants of empire to downgrade Christianity

By Chuck Colson | Christian Post Guest Columnist

The constitution of St. Helena, Ascension, and Tristan da Cunha islands states that the British territory wishes to respect “Christian and family values.” And the constitution of the Cayman Islands declares that it is a “God-fearing country based on traditional Christian values,” where “religion finds its expression in moral living and social justice.”

Given the Cayman’s reputation as an off-shore financial center, that last part might raise a few eyebrows. But what really bothers the British Foreign Office isn’t any possible inconsistency-it’s mentioning Christianity at all.

When St. Helena was debating its new constitution, the British Foreign Office told its leaders that they should consider removing references to Christianity because “the UK was now multi-faith.”

Territorial leaders, including Governor Andrew Gurr, responded that “while the UK may well be multi-faith, Christianity is the dominant religion on the island.” So, they kept it in.

Well, as you probably guessed, it didn’t end there. A committee in Parliament raised the issue, and now the Foreign Office is giving “careful consideration” to ordering the territories to remove references to Christianity.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise, I guess. A few months ago, a Foreign Office official called on the Red Cross to replace the red cross with an “alternate symbol,” such as a “red crystal.”

I’m not making this up. According to Foreign Office official Chris Bryant, the cross potentially “undermines” the work of the organization because of its “connection” to the Crusades. That the organization wasn’t founded until 600 years after the Crusades, or that it was derived from the flag of Switzerland doesn’t matter. Some non-Christian somewhere might take offense, so it has to go.

The fear of giving offense is probably why Bryant’s boss, Dave Miliband, failed to send out Christmas and Easter greetings, but remembered Ramadan. One staffer called the oversight “depressingly predictable.”

But this is more than a misguided desire to avoid offense. Foreign Office officials have been instructed to “push gay rights” and “to support civil society work for [gay] rights.” This includes translating into local languages a document called “UK Guide to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender People and Their Rights.”

These efforts prompted a protest from the Polish government after the British ambassador distributed a Polish-language version to gay activists in Warsaw.

Put it all together and it’s hard to disagree with the Anglican Archbishop of Winchester, who wrote that the Foreign Office is intent on “advancing a secularizing agenda.” Likewise, one conservative member of Parliament is justified in seeing the attempt to remove references to Christianity as “proof positive that [the British] Government is anti-Christian.”

At the very least, the Foreign Office is intent on air-brushing Britain’s Christian heritage from the official record. Not so much because it offends non-Christians, but because it offends the post-Christians in charge.

Like the man said, “depressingly predictable.”

I have noted that this Channel 4 documentary investigating the British Israeli lobby, which is being aired tonight, is causing some concerns. Some fear that this will be used as just another opportunity to throw more crap at Jews. Judging by some of the comments on the C4 website, they may be right. The anti-semitic Guardian has also previewed this.

The Jerusalem Post mentioned this program this morning and then Melanie Phillips, Biased BBC and now even Cranmer has covered this one:-

Cranmer does not know what Peter Oborne intends to say on tonight’s C4 Dispatches programme, Inside Britain’s Israel Lobby, but judging by many of the histrionic comments beneath the publicity spiel, one might think they are about to broadcast a revised version of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The recurring theme is that of ‘Global Jewish Conspiracy’: and C4 are permitting an ignorant crowd of amoebic anti-Semites to propagate their vile gospel of Jew-hatred with impunity. The thread is impeccably timed to help assuage the rising tide of anti-Semitism in the UK. No doubt The Guardian will be delighted (update: they are).

Cranmer has received an email from a communicant member of the Anglican Friends of Israel, who observes that few people are aware of the European Union Monitoring Centre for Racism and Xenophobia’s Working Definition of Antisemitism . Certainly, it appears that C4’s moderators are not, for the comments are punctuated throughout with examples of what the EUMC calls ‘the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media’. They say that current anti-Semitism ‘… charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong”. It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.’

It continues:

‘Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include…

‘Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations…

‘Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective – such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.’

Moderators of the C4 comment thread have approved numerous examples of these forms of anti-Semitic discourse. For instance:

‘We are being attacked from within by 5th columns in our parliament for this murderous regime.’

‘It is disgraceful that C4 is intending to expose the pro-Israel lobby. Surely it is a signatory to the “National Press & TV Zionist Agreement”, which stipulates in paragraph one: “Thou shalt not print nor broadcast any reference to the undemocratic control by the agents of Israel over the House of Commons &/or the House of Lords”.’

‘.. the Israel lobby works to subvert the British political process and foreign policy to serve not British interests, but the interests of a foreign occupying tyranny, a left-over from the colonial era.’

‘Let’s see the hand of global Zionism at work.’

‘We want our country back. The agents of a foreign power embedded at all levels of our government and politics need flushing out.’

‘The Zionist Lobby counts many British politicians (who) function as a fifth column in support of Israel’s illegal actions. The powerful impact of the Zionist Lobby on British politics is more damaging to our country than that of the ghastly BNP.’

No-one claims, least of all Cranmer, that the State of Israel and its religio-political policies should not be rigorously examined and critically scrutinised, and some of the comments make legitimate, hard-hitting criticisms. However, many of these comments revive the discredited Global Jewish Conspiracy theory, thereby stoking anti-Semitism in the UK, and their presence on C4’s website is unworthy of a television channel which prides itself on exposing and challenging racism wherever it is to be found.

Some fantastic news from Joel’s Trumpet

Dear friends,

This morning we received news that Maryam and Marzieh are due to be released tomorrow, Monday November 16th, 2009.

We understand after their release they might have to attend court hearings. We are rejoicing at the prospect of their release but would ask you to pray for their full and unconditional release, and for their safety and quick recovery.

We look forward to sharing more wonderful news with you later.
Thank you again for all your support and prayers.
Pray for Iran

Sincerely,
Dan & Carmen Hale
ANM Area Representatives for Iran
Advancing Native Missions

Previous Related Posts

Praise God – Washington Times Covers the story of the Iranian Christian Girls (Maryam Rostampour, 27, and Marzieh Amirizadeh Esmaeilabad, 30) Jailed for Converting to Christianity

International Christian Concern said it has learned from Elam ministries in Iran Wednesday that Maryam Rustampoor and Marzieh Amirizadeh were unexpectedly taken to appear before the court Tuesday morning and were formally charged by the judge.

Two Iranian converts to Christianity (Marzieh Amirizadeh, 30, and Maryam Rustampoor, 27) are standing strong in their faith, according to a report from Iran by the Farsi Christian News Network.

Maryam Rostampour and Marzieh Esmailabadi are Iranian Christians who were imprisoned six months ago for converting to Christianity.

Maryam Rostampour, 27, and Marzieh Amirizadeh, 30, were arrested on 5 March by Iranian security officers who confiscated their Bibles. The women were taken to Evin Prison in Tehran, where they have been held without charge since their arrest.

The case of two Iranian women, Maryam Rustampoor, 27, and Marzieh Amirizadeh, 30, suffering in Evin prison, simply for converting to Christianity, has been taken up by the Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, who steps down soon as a diocesan to concentrate on helping persecuted Christians around the world.

Women dressed in white will be gathering outside the Iranian embassy in London this Saturday as part of a prayer vigil to highlight the plight of two female Christian converts from Islam(Maryam Rostampour and Marzieh Amirizadeh) who have been held at Evin Prison in Teheran without charge for the last six months.

I’ve organized a petition through World Net Daily for the release of Maryam Rustampoor and Marzieh Amirizadeh from Iranian prison.

John Piper

If your “want to” does not conform to God’s “ought to,” what can you do to have peace?

I see at least five possible strategies.

1. You can avoid thinking about the “ought to.”

   This is the most common strategy in the world. Most people simply do not devote energy to pondering what they should be doing that they are not doing.

2. You can reinterpret the “ought to” so that it sounds just like your “want to.”

   This is a little more sophisticated and so not as common. It often takes a college education to do this with credibility, and a seminary degree to do it with finesse.

3. You can muster the willpower to do a form of the “ought to” even though you don’t have the heart of the “want to.”

   This generally looks pretty good, and is often mistaken as virtue, even by those who do it. In fact, there is a whole worldview that says doing “ought to’s” without “want to” is the essence of virtue. The problem with this is that Paul said, “God loves a cheerful giver,” which puts the merely “ought-to givers” in a precarious position.

4. You can muster the willpower to do a form of the “ought to” and feel remorse for not having the heart of the “want to.”

   This is not hypocrisy. Hypocrisy hides one of the two contradictory impulses.

5. You can seek, by grace, to have God give the “want to” so that when the time comes to do the “ought to,” you will “want to.”

   Ultimately, the “want to” is a gift of God.

   “The mind of the flesh is hostile to God…it is not able to submit to the law of God.” (Romans 8:7)

   “The natural man cannot understand the things of the Spirit of God…because they are spiritually appraised.” (1 Corinthians 2:14)

   “Perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth.” (2 Timothy 2:25)

The Biblical doctrine of original sin boils down to this (to borrow from St. Augustine): We are free to do what we like, but we are not free to like what we ought to like.

God’s free and sovereign heart-changing work is our only hope. Therefore we must pray for a new heart. We must pray for the “want to”:

Incline my heart to Your testimonies. (Psalm 119:36)

He has promised to do it:

I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes. (Ezekiel 36:27)

This is the new covenant bought by the blood of Jesus (Hebrews 8:8-13; 9:15).