Tha mi air tòiseachadh podcast den Bhìoball Gàidhlig. Audio agus tecst.

Am Bìoball – Èisd ris a’ Bhìoball ’s a’ Ghàidhlig

(c) Ruairidh MacLean 

Tha am Bioball Gaidhlig ri fhaighinn air loidhne aig Iomhaigh de chlo-bhualadh 1829

http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/publications/34-1/minority-report-a-lesson-from-peter-the-barber/

Apparently the new Equality Bill so called, will be used by gay rights activists to force the hand of funding bodies to sponsor pretty much everything they want to do.  That is what they seem to be suggesting at least.(see My Blogshare Page)  But i wonder what would happen if christian organisations tried the same thing?  I doubt they would be given the time of day.  Yet one group seems to be getting their own way most of the time even before the advent of the bill.  This bill purports to about equality and I think was intended to be about equality, but if it ends up being about making some more equal than others don’t be in the least bit suprised.

Barack Obama has withdrawn the ban on funding of embryonic stem cell research, saying that it will open up a new frontier in scientific research free from political interference.

This could be stated in another manner: Science without limits or ethical constraints.

I believe Obama has done this with good intentions, believing this move will in time improve the lot of many with serious debilatating diseases.  However, I believe he is desperately misguided in this action given that the use of embryonic stem cells neccesitates the death of human embryos, death of one human life for the relief of another.  This is not a trade that is justifiable under medical ethics.  Of course one of the strategies used to allow people to justify this stance is the depersonalisation/dehumanising of the embryo by means of language.  It is the same matter at issue here as in most abortion cases.  It is a matter of comfort or convenience.   I suppose it oughtn’t to be a surprise to us that Obama would make this decision given that he is fairly clearly pro-choice.  Though it is not a surprise it is still lamentable.

Returning to the broader issue being addressed in his broader statement regarding scientific research without interference from the political sphere.  Politics is there to lead our nation, but it appears that the gurus of secular science have mesmerised the leaders of the nations with their nigh on magical claims, so as to give up any right to dictate what these modern magician will do.  It appears that secular science is the new religion of the secular west.  The priests of this religion, who are seemingly more and more above the law, are the research scientists who seek to offer up sacrifices in their secret temples.

This ought to raise a few eyebrows.  You worry that in the present climate such a statement might be found to be illegal and worthy of a prison sentence.  Given that the government are moving to remove certain free-speech clauses from current legislation.

Side-tracked again, so back to the idea of science without limits.

History shows that there are always those who have now qualms in crossing every imaginable ethical boundary given half a chance.

I know that there will still be limits on the funding given in the USA, given that there is an application process and also that Obama was at pains to stress it was not a free for all, but whit is intesely concerning to hear poilicians make statements to the effect that science should be free from political intereference (which has mostly if not entirely been based on ethical objections).

I noticed this link on another blog, it is the sign-up page for accessing the audio resources of Westminster Theological Seminary, Philadelphia.  It is totally free, you just need to sign-up to get a log-in of your own.  There are some great resources on here, including messages from visiting lecturers.  Great stuff.

You may argue whether my title is theologically correct, but from a human perspective anyone who cannot see any hope of finding their way having lost it, is hoplessly lost.

As I see it (and the news daily reinforces my conviction) Scotland is full not only of individuals but communites that have hopelessly lost their way.  They have no hope of life-change, their lives spiraling deeper into despair and debasement.

We see trials taking place in the law courts of our land which reveal what some communities or sections of communities (effectively communities within communities) have come to.  Society promotes the inidividual’s rights to an extreme and this is taken to its logical conclusion: do what you will.  Society presses home the idea that there is no absolute right or wrong of which the logical conclusion is that nothing is wrong if you don’t believe it to be so.  Our media stands on street corners pushing evolution and consumerism, both of which devalue human life.

Yet when those who have unquestioningly followed this philosophy in their lives and have bowed to the dictates of the fallen heart in a way which society disapproves of, they are demonised.  Not that I’m justifying in any way what anyone has done, it is right that they be judged guilty and punished.  What I am saying is, what reason do individualist-relativist-evolutionist-consumerists have for condemning their actions?  The answer, absolutely none whatsoever.  Those found guilty have actually followed the dictums of these inconsistent philosophers.  They are the very embodiment of that philosophy.  They did what was good in their own eyes.

The secular philosphers will doubtless respond and say, “There are societal norms and standards of decency that we do not wish to cross.”  But where do these originate?  In our culture they originate mostly from the Bible.  But what if the culture, the mass of the people, come to approve of a certain behaviour?  (A current example would be homosexual practise)  What happens when the societal ideals are different?  Historically you do not have to look far away (geopgraphically) to find examples of where society did not hold to the same ideals of common decency.  In Celtic Britain for example young women and children were sacrificed in pagan worship.  In a relativisitic framework this is right if you believe it, and even in a framework which acquieses in societal ideals the difficulty is not resolved, because clearly it was deemed suitable in the society where it took place.  No secularist wishes to say he thinks that some behaviour which the mass of the people believe to be wrong, is wrong, but logically secular atheistic philosophy can have no framework for truth, right and wrong, but only the shifting sands of human opinion, which will change according to how debased the particular individual or society has become.  Only if there is an absolute framework of truth can one catagorically state that such actions are wrong.

So where am I going with this?  Well I don’t think that it is only individuals that are on trial, our nation is on trial because those on trial are living their lives according to the principles of the atheistic secularism that has been so aggresively propogated over the last few decades.

They are hopelessly lost in the maze or should I say web of human philosophy.  They are bound fast in the chains of sin, which are being reinforced by the very philosophy which claims to be setting them free.  Their only hope is the gospel of God’s grace and intervention.