Enduring Gut-Wrenching Pain to Find Your New Beginning

9:23AM EDT 8/22/2013        JENNIFER LECLAIRE

“Behold, I will do a new thing, now it shall spring forth; shall you not know it? I will even make a road in the wilderness and rivers in the desert” (Is. 43:19).

That rhema word from Scripture nearly four years ago kicked off a season of change in my life that hasn’t quit. I’m convinced that I’ve seen more changes in my life over the past few years than many people see in two decades. I’m talking major life changes. Some of those changes produced immediate joy. Others produced prolonged pain before producing joy.

I’ve noticed a cycle, if you can call it that, where one change comes at the heels of another and then another—finally followed by the avalanche. Some of the changes are welcomed while others are gut-wrenching, even when you know it’s God’s will. I still don’t like change, but I’ve learned to embrace it because I’ve seen the fruit of faithfully following God through life's transitions—and that fruit is good!

Facing Sweeping Changes

Maybe you are seeing sweeping changes in your life even now. Whether they are welcome changes, like getting married and having a baby, or unwelcome changes, like getting divorced and losing a loved one to death, change can cause confusion, stress, delight, anticipation, fear, joy—a whole range of fickle emotions that ebb and flow with what seems like the powerful rush of a rolling tide.

Before we go any further, understand this: The only thing that doesn’t change is God. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever (Heb. 13:8). Everything else—I said everything else—is subject to change. I won’t recite all the words of Solomon here, but suffice it to say that “to everything there is a season, a time for every purpose under heaven” (Eccl. 3:1).

So if you are going through a season of change—especially gut-wrenching changes—how do you position yourself to walk worthy of your calling? How do you yield to God’s will while resisting the enemy? How do you embrace the change that will produce more of the character of Christ and the fruit of the Spirit in your life—and perhaps in the lives of others involved?

Learning to Let Go

Keeping your eyes on God, who doesn’t change, is the critical first step (Heb. 12:2). The Lord really is your rock, your fortress and your deliverer (Ps. 18:2). His hope is the anchor of your soul (Heb. 6:19). When you keep your mind on Him, you’ll remain in perfect peace even amid the most stormy changes (Is. 26:3). When you keep your eyes on Him, you’ll find that road in the wilderness and the rivers in the desert that Isaiah prophesied (Is. 43:19).

Next, you’ve got to be willing to let go of what the Holy Spirit is showing you to let go of. If you want that new beginning—if you want that new thing God has in store for you—then you must let go even if it feels like it’s going to kill you; even if you have to do it through tears; even if other people don’t agree with you; even if you can’t see where to go next. When you let go, He’ll show you what to do next, just like he showed Abram what to do when he left everything behind to follow God (Gen. 12:1-3).

The letting go part is probably the hardest part of the change process. I’ve written several articles—including "How to Forget Those Things Which Are Behind," "Burning the Bridges to Your Past," and "Are You Willing to Leave Your Baggage Behind?"—on this topic because it’s a real pain point for people. I had to learn that lesson and learn it well, and you should too.

Sometimes there are soul ties with people, churches or even things that you need to break. The pull you feel to keep going back to the same people and things God has told you to leave behind is often a soul tie. A soul tie is a deep emotional bond. When David met King Saul’s son Jonathan, there was an immediate bond between them. The Bible says, “The soul of Jonathan was knit to the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul” (1 Sam. 18:1). That’s intense. When you move on, sometimes you have to break soul ties, in the name of Jesus, before you can move forward full speed.

Pursuing the New Vision

Once you’ve let go of the people, places and things holding you back, ask God for a new vision. What does God have next for you? I assure you, He has a new thing in mind. God may even resurrect an old dream you thought was dead. You won’t see this spiritual vision come to pass overnight—there is a time of transition between the old and the new—but with clarity, you’ll have the discipline you need to keep pressing forward (Prov. 29:18).

During this transition time, pursue any emotional healing you need. We all suffer wounds from the words and actions of others, from the work of the enemy, from our own sinful mistakes, from disappointing life events and even from doing the work of the ministry. Sometimes we have to suffer for Christ (Phil. 1:29). It’s easy enough to get resentful, bitter and unforgiving. But walking toward your new beginning means letting go of these things also. Be assured that God is using it all for good (Rom. 8:28).

Many men in the Bible suffered great losses on their way to greatness. Just look at Job, Joseph and David. But all of these men endured the enemy’s best shot and took back what he stole—and then some. Each of them had a new beginning that brought glory to God. They persevered, kept their eyes on God and waited on His deliverance. So while you are enduring gut-wrenching pain, take comfort in God’s Word: “Behold, I will do a new thing, now it shall spring forth; shall you not know it? I will even make a road in the wilderness and rivers in the desert” (Is. 43:19). Amen.

Jennifer LeClaire is news editor at Charisma. She is also the author of several books, including The Spiritual Warrior's Guide to Defeating Jezebel. You can email Jennifer at   jennifer.leclaire@charismamedia.com or visit her website here. You can also join Jennifer on Facebook or follow her on Twitter.

Thatcher's spin doctor says fracking protestors want UK to live in 'tepees and wigwams'. Daily Express

ANTI-FRACKING protestors are "blinkered totalitarians" who want "us all to live in their yurts, tepees and wigwams" according to Margaret Thatcher's former spin doctor Bernard Ingham.

By: Owen Bennett

Published: Thu, August 22, 2013

5Comments

Bernad Ingham has severly criticised the anti-fracking lobby

The problem with anti-fracking fanatics is that, like other zealots, they are blinkered totalitarians.

Bernard Ingham

The 81-year-old has also claimed modern environmentalists are showing "hypocrisy, utter stupidity and exaggeration" over fracking, arguing it has far less impact on the countryside than wind farms.

The former Downing Street Press Secretary made the comments just days after the Green MP Caroline Lucas was among protesters arrested at a site in Balcombe, West Sussex where energy firm Cuadrilla is drilling for oil.

Writing in the Yorkshire Post, Mr Ingham said: "The problem with anti-fracking fanatics is that, like other zealots, they are blinkered totalitarians.

He added: "Fracking for shale gas is merely the latest example of their hypocrisy, utter stupidity and exaggeration."

Mr Ingham, who served as press secretary to Mrs Thatcher for 11 years, argued so-called green energy such as wind and solar power had failed to reduce C02 emissions, and are hampering the British economy.

Green MP Caroline Lucas was arrested during the anti-fracking protests

"So much for the average environmentalist’s tender loving concern for the poor, for the unemployed, for the ability of the nation to compete in the world and for a healthy economy capable of looking after the health and welfare of its citizens," he said

"It seems they want us all to live in their yurts, tepees and wigwams in a sort of glorious, save-the-planet pre-industrial squalour – regardless of our manifest objections. If that is not totalitarianism, I don’t know what is.

"As for stupidity, their entire approach to energy is to plump for everything that does not work and exclude everything that does – coal, gas, oil and especially nuclear power which emits next to no CO2.

"Worse still, their long campaign has captured our limited politicians. The result is that, short of an early shale gas bonanza, we can no longer rely on any government of whatever political complexion to provide secure supplies of energy at affordable cost."

Green Party London Assembly Member Jenny Jones said: “As well as being offensive to local communities concerned about fracking, Mr Ingham’s ill-judged comments show he hasn’t done his homework. 

“The debate isn’t one between proponents of progress on one side and ‘green zealots’ on the other. It’s not totalitarianism to want the Government to invest in clean, renewable energy technologies.  You don’t have to live in a yurt to want to avert dangerous climate change.

“As for exaggerating the risks of fracking, the International Energy Agency – not known for hype – has warned of a range of impacts on local communities, including the potential contamination of groundwater.

“And the effect on fuel bills would be minimal at best. Ofgem and Deutsche Bank both say that the widespread use of UK shale gas is unlikely to bring down prices”

No Dash For Gas, which organised the Balcombe camp, said they would return to Balcombe in the future, calling the campaign a "marathon" not a "sprint".

Protesters believe the drilling could lead to fracking, which they claim imposes environmental risks including water contamination and small earthquakes.

Enduring Gut-Wrenching Pain to Find Your New Beginning

Enduring Gut-Wrenching Pain to Find Your New Beginning

I abhor bigotry, but why should we demonise schools that don't want to promote gay lifestyles?, Daily Mail Article

By STEPHEN GLOVER

PUBLISHED: 22:58, 21 August 2013 | UPDATED: 22:58, 21 August 2013

 
 
 

31 shares

106

View
comments

We now live in a world in which civil partnerships are accepted by most people as perfectly normal and soon we will have gay marriage

The biggest social change of the past ten or 20 years must surely be the general transformation in attitudes towards homosexuality.

It was not very long ago that a homosexual embrace or kiss on television sent some newspapers and politicians into orbit, and a thousand angry pens into hyperdrive. Now we live in a world in which civil partnerships are accepted by most people as perfectly normal. Soon we will have gay marriage.

Most gay MPs no longer huddle beneath the parapet. The ‘gay vote’ is now considered so powerful that David Cameron sought an audience last week with the gay panjandrum Stephen Fry in an East End pub to discuss the ill treatment of homosexuals in Russia.

But some gays, it seems, still feel they are the victims of discrimination. Gay rights activists have identified some 40 schools across the country which allegedly state in their sex-education guidelines that governors will not allow teachers to promote homosexuality, or are ambiguous on the issue.

Stonewall, which campaigns for homosexual rights, is indignant, and suggests that these schools are reviving the language of Section 28, the law introduced by the Thatcher government in 1988 aimed at ‘loony left’ councils, some of which were energetically promoting homosexuality in schools.

Section 28 banned councils from using taxpayers’ money to fund books, plays, films or other material to promote homosexuality. Though its wording was hardly draconian, and no prosecution was ever brought under it, Section 28 has assumed mythic proportions in the minds of gay activists.

Despite opposition from rebels of all parties in the House of Lords, as well as from the Roman Catholic Church and other religious groups, the law was removed from the statute book by the Blair government in 2003. In 2009, David Cameron apologised for the Tories’ original championing of Section 28.

 

More...

• Chris Christie signs law banning therapists in New Jersey from trying to convert gay teenagers to being straight
• Stephen Fry and Cameron hold secret summit on 'gay hate' Olympics... in an East End pub: Actor wants boycott of Winter games in Russia over rights abuses
• PETER McKAY: Why Dave is really cosying up to Mr Fry

How much has changed in ten years. The Department for Education is evidently embarrassed by the reports about the 40 or so schools, and various Tory, Lib Dem and Labour MPs are quoted as saying they must be brought into line, and we must not go back to the antediluvian past.

Many of these schools ‘outed’ by campaigners are self-governing Academies. Some have hastily backed down, while others have gone to ground. None seems to be eager to justify itself in public.

Yet the British Humanist Association, which has somehow got in on the act, huffs and puffs as though a major crime has been committed. Its spokesman speaks of the ‘pernicious’ Section 28, and the need to bring these errant schools to heel.

Meanwhile Ben Summerskill, chief executive of Stonewall, has circulated an email in which he announces a new series of training events for staff in primary and secondary schools this autumn ‘to equip teachers with the tools and confidence to tackle homosexual bullying’.

The 'gay vote' is now considered so powerful that David Cameron sought an audience last week with the gay panjandrum Stephen Fry in an East End pub to discuss the ill treatment of homosexuals in Russia

In fact, there’s no evidence of any homosexuals being bullied at any of these schools. Perhaps this is just Mr Summerskill’s way of saying that his organisation stands ready to re-educate teachers who show signs of straying from the new orthodoxy.

What strikes me about this story is that some of the representatives of a group that was once undoubtedly the victim of persecution are now showing a degree of intolerance towards people with whom they do not agree.

There are more than 30,000 schools in this country. A mere 40 or so have been identified as being either opposed to the promotion of homosexuality or ambiguous on the issue. This is a minuscule percentage, though of course there may be others.

And yet there is outrage, simulated or not. The campaigner Peter Tatchell, whose bravery in several spheres I admire, declares that ‘this is spookily similar to Section 28 in Britain and the new anti-gay law in Russia’.

Really? None of these schools appears to be demonising homosexuals. Grace Academy, which runs schools with a Christian ethos in Coventry, Solihull and Darlaston in the West Midlands, is quoted by The Independent newspaper as saying: ‘The governing body will not permit the promotion of homosexuality.’

Gay rights activists have identified 40 schools across the country which allegedly state in their sex-education guidelines that governors will not allow teachers to promote homosexuality, or are ambiguous on the issue

The two Crest Academies for boys and girls in Neasden, North-West London, have a similar rubric, as does the Castle View Enterprise Academy in Sunderland, though it has now deleted its guidance from its website.

Not one school cited by campaigners denounces homosexuality, or suggests that gays are in any way reprehensible. They simply do not want to promote it on an equal basis with heterosexuality. Of course, there may be schools, particularly Muslim ones, that take a harder line.

In my perfect world, schools would not offer any view about any sexual orientation.  Certainly no teacher ever did in an explicit way at my school. It should really be a matter for parents. But I accept that the State has long since arrogated to itself the right to instruct — I will not say indoctrinate — children in these matters.

What, though, if some parents do not agree with the State on grounds of conscience or religious belief? The whole philosophy behind Academies is that they should be self-governing and independent, and as free as possible from government diktats imposed by Whitehall.

Ben Summerskill has circulated an email announcing a series of training events for staff in schools this autumn 'to equip teachers with the tools and confidence to tackle homosexual bullying'

Most of us, I think, would abhor any educational establishment that encouraged its pupils to discriminate against homosexuals, or any other social group. Apart from being morally objectionable, such an approach would break a number of laws.

If there is evidence of any teachers in a state school — or indeed any school — preaching hatred against gays, or stirring up prejudice against them, they should at the very least be dismissed, and preferably prosecuted.

But shouldn’t parents who have reservations about the promotion of homosexuality on equal terms with heterosexuality be free to send their children to schools where their views are reflected, as well as respected?

Such views were held by a majority of people until quite recently, and they are still held by many decent folk who don’t think that homosexuals are inferior or deviant or to be pitied in any way. Nonetheless, all things being equal, they would probably be happier if their children turned to be straight rather than gay.

Don’t such people have a right to influence their children’s values according to their own beliefs and consciences, rather than having them imposed by gay campaigners or commissars from the Department for Education, who extol freedom so long as it is the kind of freedom of which they approve?

Gays should be free to live and work and play just as non-gays are, and it is a credit to our society that at last they are able to do so. They have been abominably treated in the past, and perhaps a few of them still are.

But those gays and non-gays who believe in freedom of conscience should defend the rights of their fellow citizens so long as their own rights are not threatened.

Section 28 is dead and buried, and rightly so. But prejudice and intolerance live on. And they have a strange propensity to flourish among the people who were once their victims.

Share or comment on this article

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2399246/STEPHEN-GLOVER-I-abhor-bigotry-demonise-schools-dont-want-promote-gay-lifestyles.html#ixzz2chQYIOdx
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook