On the 7th July 2005 (often referred to as 7/7 in the UK) there were a series of co-ordinated suicide attacks in London which targeted civilians using the public transport system during the morning rush hour.   Four Islamist terrorists detonated bombs aboard London Underground trains across the city and, later, a fourth on a double-decker bus in Tavistock Square.   The outcome was that fifty-two civilians and the four bombers were killed in the attacks, and over 700 more were injured.   It was a horrendous day.

On the 7th July 2013  the news was completely different and the British nation rejoiced in an event, not mourned as they had eight years before.    Andy Murray, the British tennis player became the first “Brit” to win the Wimbledon singles championship since Fred Perry in 1936.  Now you may not be interested in tennis in particular, or sport in general, but a huge television audience were glued to their screens in addition to those at the event and there were some very interesting principles at work.

 (Andy Murray) is a 26 year old Scot from Dunblane, a small, affluent cathedral town with a population of less than 8,000 people, and he was just eight when a killer stormed into his school to shoot dead 17 people, mostly children, before turning a gun on himself – and so he is no stranger to atrocity.

Mr. Herbert Armstrong produced a booklet some years ago entitled “The Seven Laws of Success” and Andy Murray used six of these to produce his stunning triumph.   The Wimbledon authorities said that on the centre court, a sun trap,  the heat approached 50 degrees Celsius (122 degrees Fahrenheit) and in such heat, Andy and his Serbian opponent, the world’s number one player, Novak Djokovic, produced an epic game with both men showing skill, stamina, determination, the will to win, guts, strength, courage, precision, judgment, fitness and much more.

Mr. Armstrong listed seven laws of success with the 7th being “contact with, guidance and continuance help of God.”    Whilst it is not for me to comment on Andy’s belief or otherwise in God, perhaps that may be the one law that he didn’t use?   If he did, he would have used all the laws but he certainly used the other six.   These, as written about by Mr Armstrong were:

·having the right goal, which Andy had from a very young age

·education or preparation – he spent years preparing to win at the highest level

·good health – he and his team ensured that he ate well and stayed in peak condition

·drive – he had this in abundance and there was nothing half-hearted in what he did; otherwise he would be found out at the highest level of his sport

·resourcefulness – as Mr Armstrong wrote, “when complications, obstacles, unexpected circumstances appear to block your path, you must be equipped with resourcefulness to   solve the problem, overcome the obstacle, and continue on your course”.   In his career, Andy had to be resourceful and even in a single game it is often necessary to be resourceful and to “think outside the box” as the modern saying goes, in order to succeed

·perseverance – he persevered, having lost four finals of Grand Slam competitions but in the last year through sheer determination and perseverance he won the gold medal at the Olympics, the US Open championship and then Wimbledon.

Perhaps without even knowing it, he did what needed to be done to achieve his goals, and six of the seven laws of success were utilised in order to succeed at the highest level.

What can we, as Christians, take from this?   If someone can dedicate his life to achieving a temporal goal by using these principles, how much more is this true for those of us whom God has called to be in His Family for eternity?   Can we do any less than Andy did?   Of course not!

The loser’s parents both gave Andy’s mother a big hug, and Novak Djokovic was very sportsmanlike, giving all the credit to his opponent, and he was very gracious in defeat.   Perhaps we could also learn from such outstanding examples of excellent and heart-warming behaviour.

It was a tennis match, albeit a very high profile one and certainly one where many important principles were shown by those involved.   Just a tennis match – no, it was much more than that for those with eyes to see.

In two of my last three editorials I have written about the Bible, God’s instruction manual, being ignored over the questions of women bishops in the Church of England and same sex marriage.  

Thinking about those two issues and the fact that many seem to think that the Word of God is flexible and must “move with the times” reminded me that there have been those in leadership positions who actually did know right from wrong and didn’t expect the goalposts to move in order to fit in with what the movers and shakers in modern society expected and required.

The phrase “the lady’s not for turning” is a famous phrase used by the late UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher at the Conservative Party Conference on October 10, 1980.   The people of God can learn a very important lesson from what Mrs Thatcher said.   I don’t refer to any political agenda or any political party as we are to stay clear of the political scene and have no involvement with it whatsoever.   I refer to the fact that when it comes to staying with principles we believe in that we should not be for turning either.

We have seen over the years those who have been for turning and are no longer part of the Church, and so it is a point that has to be made time and time again to remind us not to relax.   If any of us let down in any way, our adversary will exploit any weakness he can find.

We live in an era of licentiousness, permissiveness and outright liberality where almost anything goes, and God’s people stand out very clearly from those all around us.   If that is not the case, then we are really in trouble!

God has set the standard, and He has no need to conform to the requirements of modern society.   He created us and has no need to let His creation dictate to Him.   He knows what is best.   God does not change (Malachi 3:6) and that refers to His character and the keeping of His law.   Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever, as we read in Hebrews 13:8.   They are not for turning and neither should we be.

Many of us, no doubt, have been inspired by many people over the years. These may be people we know, people we have heard about as well as many inspiring biblical examples. It is always an uplifting experience to read, see or experience those whose conduct and behaviour sets them well above the ordinary run of the mill behaviour so prevalent in society today.
 
We have become accustomed to the phrase good “role-models” indicating that such people are worth following and imitating. Unfortunately, many whom we are told fall into this category are anything but good role models. Public figures in the political world, in sports and entertainment are often those whose behaviour is copied but, many times, is not imitating or copying the right sort of examples.
 
Sometimes, something can happen to us personally that can be an inspiration. This happened to me (and others) recently. Mr Ralph Sage, a member of the Church of the Eternal God congregation in San Diego falls into this category. On the Sabbath of 23rd March this year, Mr Sage attended services with his wife Gertrude. Just a few hours later, he rang me to say that his wife had died unexpectedly an hour or so before. Mr Sage himself has cancer and has been given just a few months to live by the medical profession. But in this short phone call, he said that he would be at Passover services the following evening. There were no ifs and buts about this even though his wife of over 61 years had just been found dead at their home.
 
The following evening, Mr Sage was at Passover services along with some others who, themselves, had serious health and other concerns. The service was inspirational because of those who were determined to attend in spite of their personal situations which might have deflected those less dedicated.

Since that time, Mr Sage has still attended most church services and has been an inspiration to all of those in his local congregation, and beyond. In an age where so many bad examples are a daily occurrence, Mr Sage’s approach was truly inspirational.

On the 5th February 2013, MPs in the House of Commons overwhelmingly backed the plan to legalise “gay marriage” in the UK by 400 votes to 175. Even some of those who voted against this measure said that there was insufficient time given to debate this issue. As members of the true Church of God know, on such a matter no debate is necessary; the answer defining right conduct is there in the Word of God. End of story!

The Prime Minister, David Cameron, approved and promoted this plan, after the two previous Prime Ministers, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, had been equally enthusiastic about promoting this ungodly practice.  

All three of these politicians profess to being Christians, but not one of them seems to be in the least bit bothered by what God’s instruction manual, the Bible, has to say on this matter. I mentioned this trait in my last editorial (“Instruction Manual Ignored Again,” Update 572, week of January 11, 2013, about the Church of England voting about the ordination of women bishops. God’s Word never seems to be properly and correctly studied, or even consulted, when such situations arise; it’s the 21st century, and we have to move on and “get with it”.

But how did we get into this mess? It’s that frog’s fault yet again. For anyone who hasn’t heard this analogy, Wikipedia explains it as follows: “The boiling frog story is a widespread anecdote describing a frog slowly being boiled alive. The premise is that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability of people to react to significant changes that occur gradually.”  

The significant changes that have occurred in society, like “gay marriage”, have come about slowly over quite a period of time. Of course, our societies’ problems are manifold, and “gay marriage” is just one of its many evils. But it shows how “changes” are introduced and accepted over time. The Sexual Offences Act 1967 was an Act of Parliament in the United Kingdom which decriminalised homosexual acts in private between two men, both of whom had to have attained the age of 21. At that time, public opinion was very much against this abhorrent act. (The Church of God does not take a stand or utter a position whether or not homosexual conduct should be considered a crime punishable by our human governments. We understand that this is Satan’s world, and that true Christians are not to engage in political acts or agendas, but they are ambassadors of the world tomorrow, when Christ will set up the Kingdom of God here on earth and establish true and fair laws regulating human conduct.)

However, in the next 38 years much was done, without too much publicity, but was moulding public opinion wherever and whenever possible. The old saying that it is a “cinch by the inch but hard by the yard” perfectly describes how “progress” was made. Stonewall, the lesbian, gay and bisexual charity, has been in the forefront of helping to change public perception, and as time passed, hardened views were softened.

Wikipedia again reports that “since 2005 same-sex couples have been allowed to enter into civil partnerships, a separate union which provides the legal consequences of marriage.” Former Prime Minister Tony Blair was a great advocate for the homosexual lobby. As Shadow Home Secretary, before he became Prime Minister, he not only supported the lowering of the age of consent for homosexuals from age 18 to 16, but quite literally championed it. When such high profile individuals support and promote such a cause, others are galvanised too, and it then increases in intensity. Many who were implacably opposed to this before may now take a more “live and let live” approach.

It has taken about half a century of hard work and constant application to arrive at the stage where “gay marriage” is now seen as a good thing, and many people who would have thought otherwise 50 years ago are now in favour of this. It’s that frog again! Unfortunately, in such a climate, young people are raised in a society where this “alternate lifestyle” is now accepted as normal.  

What can we learn from all of this? Given enough time, enough commitment and enough patience, all manner of evil can be foisted on society, and indeed has been. The year 2013 is a very different place, and with very different acceptances, than was the case 50-60 years ago. This is how the verse in Isaiah 5:20 can be explained: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!”  And the next verse answers why: “Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, And prudent in their own sight!”

Politicians think they know better than God. Others ignore biblical teaching and many scoff. The time is coming when our countries will be punished severely, and they will wonder why. The answer will have been there all along for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

The analogy of the frog can help us understand how Satan works and what he has achieved. We need to understand such workings and to make sure that we will never be taken in by them. We can also learn the lesson that we have a lifetime to make progress in our Christian lives, and little by little, perhaps indiscernibly at times, we should be improving, growing and overcoming which is pleasing in the sight of God. When we become more and more accustomed to positive change, then a modified “analogy” about the frog will have a desirable effect in our lives.

In late November of 2012, just a few weeks ago, the Church of England voted against the ordination of women bishops. In 1975, they had voted for women priests, and the ordination of women bishops was considered to be the next logical step.  On 12 March 1994, the first 32 women had been ordained as Church of England priests.

The measure to consecrate women as bishops was backed overwhelmingly by the Church of England Synod, but fell short of the required two thirds majority among the laity.   Having set up their own voting system, it appears that when that system doesn’t deliver what the majority wants, then recriminations start.

Many prominent people uttered their dismay.  The current Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, warned that the decision would diminish the Church’s credibility in the public eye.  The Archbishop elect also wanted the measure to go through as did Lord Carey, a previous Archbishop of Canterbury.

The Prime Minister was disappointed with the outcome, and one prominent politician said that there was no theological reason why women shouldn’t be bishops, and he was bemoaning the lack of political considerations in the church!

The good and the great lined up to decry the result, and there was talk of having another vote soon. One speaker said that the church must reconvene to discuss this, meaning that the wrong result was reached. That reminded me of the situation where the Euro was voted against by Ireland and another vote was taken later when the decision was overturned. Just keep voting until you get the answer you want!

Headlines in UK newspapers included “Women bishops: a failure of leadership”; “Women bishops: Did feminism undermine the campaign?”;  “Church has lost credibility in society, says Archbishop”; plus many others.

There was discussion about the “antidisestablishmentarianism” issue, which means “opposition to the disestablishment of the Church of England”; that is, not to remove the Anglican Church’s status as the state Church of England. Some thoughts were expressed that perhaps now was the time to separate the national church from the state.

In the interviews I saw and the reports I read, Scripture was generally conspicuous by its absence. The biblical teaching that women are to keep silent in the churches (1 Corinthians 14:34; 1 Timothy 2:11-12) was raised once in my hearing, and not answered. One submission was that since Jesus was born of a woman and the first person to see Jesus after the crucifixion was also a woman, women should be allowed to become bishops!! I felt that that was hardly a convincing argument!

Should we be surprised? For years, the Church of England has had senior figures giving the distinct impression that they didn’t believe in the Word of God.  Some years ago, one bishop was reported as saying that the crucifixion was a “conjuring trick with bones.” This same person became one of the first clerics in the Church of England to publicly bless a civil partnership between two homosexual men, one of whom was a vicar! It seems that it is expected that God has to conform to the requirements of modern society.

There is little fidelity to the Bible today in the world outside of the true Church of God. His instruction manual is consistently ignored. Those of us who believe in the Bible are not subject to the dictates of men or political pressure; nor are we pressed into “modernising”. We simply let the Bible be our guide and had the Church of England taken the same stance, the voting over women priests and women bishops would never have been undertaken in the first place, and much angst and difficulties would have been eliminated.

For more information, please read our Q&A, entitled “Sermons by Women?” and our booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families“.

The day following the recent US Presidential election, I tuned in to BBC radio and television programmes to see what the reaction was. One question was asked about what the Republican party now had to do in the light of this defeat. Answers given by several commentators and American politicians were that President Obama and his team had understood the mood of the country about such matters as gay rights and abortion, as the liberal agenda moved forward. In fact, one “blogger” said that the Republican party was primarily a religious party and would have to leave religious matters alone, if they ever wanted to get elected again. Such, it appears, is the antipathy towards God and His Word.

A few days before the election, hurricane Sandy hammered the eastern coast of the United States and caused billions of dollars’ worth of damage. Hurricane Katrina caused huge damage to New Orleans in 2005, and there have been many other disasters in between.

Not one commentator I heard mentioned the sowing and reaping principle.  The agenda of approving perversion, killing in war and murdering the unborn (just three of a raft of immoral behaviours) seems to have no connection in their minds with the punishments now being experienced. But the Bible says: “Do not be deceived, God is not mocked; for whatsoever a man sows, that he will also reap” (Galatians 6:7).

God promises blessings for righteous behaviour and punishment for unrighteous behaviour (see Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28–these are principles that still apply in our time). There seems to be little or no recognition of this in society today, and these connections still go unrecognised.

The Church of God has forecast the downward spiral of our nations for many decades but, unfortunately, as people grow ever more distant from God and His ways, so the punishments will continue and increase. If ungodly practices were repented of and eliminated, countries would benefit enormously, but there seems to be no general recognition that behaviour is wrong!

As our nations continue to lurch from crisis to crisis, many more bad days lie ahead. After the Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord, the world will have the righteous rule and government of God on earth. But until that time, with no leaders having the answers and none of them truly trusting God, more punishments will inevitably follow.