Mrs May faces no-confidence vote
Open-Air Prayer at West Ham
Skip to comment form
Thank you for this explanation Stephen. Very helpful.
I’m sure the reason God wants us out with no deal is because we should not be yoked in anyway to this corrupt institution, not even one tentacle. Deals are compromises.
When we are out, we can trade with Europe as we see fit and with mutual cooperation.
There may be other reasons too such as making things a bit uncomfortable for us until we begin to acknowledge our need of Him again in this land.
Thank you, Stephen, for your article and the work you have put in – I found it v informative.
“Mrs May has assured her MPs she would not take them into the next election. So they would have to elect a new leader, possibly further delaying the process.”
I remember some comment, after the no confidence vote on Mrs May, about her saying she would stand down before the next election. It was something to the effect that she may have only been referring to the 2022 election and not one before then. But I can’t remember the source.
However, this Guardian article, 12 Sept, states that Con MPs weren’t told exactly when she would stand down and that JRM was sceptical about Mrs May using the word ‘intention’:
‘MPs present said the prime minister made clear she would have liked to fight the next general election – to make up for the Conservatives’ poor performance in 2017 – but signalled that she would step down before 2022.’
‘However, when pressed by colleagues, MPs said she carefully avoided offering a specific date at which she would resign….’
‘…However, the chair of the European Research Group of Brexiter backbenchers, Jacob Rees-Mogg, who has been calling for May to face a vote of no confidence for several weeks, claimed the prime minister had “hedged her bets” in the meeting.’
‘“She said that in her heart she would like to fight the 2022 election, but that she recognised the party did not want her to, and therefore it was not her intention to,” he said. “But the word ‘inten-tion’ is a classic politician’s word, because intentions can change.”’
(It’s just that I’ve got in the habit of looking for ‘dark sentences’ lately! Although I don’t see how she could lead the Party into another election.)
On 11th of December 2018 I believe God gave me the following:
I believe this to be the most significant important spiritual event in the United Kingdoms of Wales, Northern Ireland, Scotland and England, also the spiritual consequences towards the rest of the world.
The entering in to a ‘political’ Union with Europe was made for the UK on a deliberate lie, this foundation to the beginning to any union and has I believe opened up the UK to the ‘Spirit of Deception’.
The history of the spirit of deception over our nation is an important one, as this has been allowed to grow before the referendum on joining the EEC.
A major point to address the ‘Spirit of Deception’ to continue is for Christians need to be Honest for the reasons towards leaving the growing unelected power of the leadership of the United states of Europe.
The Core issue is, who do we worship and to whom do we build our Altar?
Elijah said they must choose to worship God or Baal. They could not worship both. It is wicked to worship idols.
When Elijah built an altar to God and gave an open challenge to King Ahab. He told Ahab to bring all his people to a mountain.
This challenge presented, is that it is done openly at a high place where everyone can see and the issue of ‘whose God we chose to server’ was made clearly before the whole nation state.
God sent fire down from heaven. The fire burned Elijah’s sacrifice. It burned the wood and the stones. It dried up all the water. The people saw the power of God.
What are the points for us today as we consider Elijah’s altar to God ?
I suggest that the roots are turning away from the one true God and acceptance of foreign gods into the midst of the nation and the openness to the worship of idols.
I believe all the key issues are found in the roots of the EU, the removal of God from every aspect of law governing all those in the EU.
I really don’t think Jean-Claude Juncker or Donald Tusk or anybody else is asking you to worship Baal. It’s as rare a practice on the Continent as it is here.
It is commonplace for churches and other building to be built on the site of old temples. In Rome, you can famously see a temple of Mithras beneath the church of San Clemente, whereas in London an insurance company had its premises built over one. Back in Rome, the Pantheon is preserved from its floor to the top of its dome, but has long been a church. The similarly complete temple in Nîmes has served as a church. In the Roman forum, several temples are incorporated into churches. In Athens, the temple of Athena (the Parthenon) has served as a church and a mosque, without any apparent ill effects on anybody. There is an obvious mosque in Spain serving as a cathedral, and an obvious Gothic cathedral in Cyprus serving as a mosque. Earlier Christian churches in Constantinople and elsewhere in Turkey became mosques. In Greater India, Hindus and Muslims took over the temples of Buddhists, and Muslims have taken over from Hindus. In England, although the details may not be well documented, many village churches appear to be built on prominent pagan sites. In Spitalfields, a Huguenot church became first a synagogue, and then a mosque, as populations changed.
This very widespread practice seldom seems to have caused anybody any problems. Rituals such as consecration and deconsecration are available (and indeed, not a few small disused churches in England have become mosques with the blessing of their former owners, and to the satisfaction of the new ones —I know one which has even kept a cross which is part of the architecture). There only seems to be a problem where ownership and holiness are in dispute, as in Jerusalem (almost as much between different Christian denominations as between Jews and Muslims). There are, of course, similar cases in India.
Returning to Rome, the Capitoline Hill is quite large, and although the Palazzo dei Conservatori is built on it, it seems to have overlapped only slightly with the actual temple of Jupiter, which was mainly further south (on the other side of what is now the Via di Tempio di Giove). There is thus a MUCH smaller connection between the two than in most of the other examples I have mentioned, and I don’t think anybody need fear the intervention of Jupiter in their affairs, especially not people who don’t believe in Jupiter anyway. I doubt if anybody has worshipped this so-called god for 1500 years.
If long neglected “gods” are a risk to people who go near their former temples, one would do well to steer clear of the British Museum, which houses the extensive remains of very many.
It is a common error to demand a pagan deity have ‘Baal’ written on it before you concede it’s an unholy rival to the Lord Jesus. The point is, every time you pay homage or just acknowledge something or someone other than Almighty God as self-existent, just ‘there’, you have set up an idol, just as the people did in Elijah’s day.
Good point about most of the churches in Rome being built on the ruins of temples, taking over those sites and using them for Christian worship. Jupiter’s was the only temple not to receive that treatment. It makes no difference that Palazzo dei Conservatori overlaps Jupiter’s temple rather than occupies the exact site. You can see the actual foundations of the temple in the museum. And for Paul-Henri Spaak, the EEC’s founder, it was the nearest he was going to get.
And again the error, demanding people actually worship ‘Jupiter’ in name before conceding they are are following the same spirit. John in Revelation 17 calls Rome ‘Babylon’. Rome wasn’t actually called ‘Babylon’. What John means is that the pagan spirit of Babylon, drawn from the rebellion of Babel, and which ran through Persia and Greece, was at his time of writing present in Rome. And it’s deliberately present in Spaak’s revived Roman empire as well as you will see in the videos. (The EU have even reared up a representation of the Tower of Babel.) That’s the spiritual dimension and it’s why the UK needs to leave.
And, oh dear, the British Museum merely has the artifacts people used to represent various deities. They change from time to time. Do they retain any aspect of spiritual power? If they do, the power of Jesus, which can be ministered by every believer, beats any of them every time.
Quite a few other temples in Rome, such as the Temples of Saturn and of Hercules, were never incorporated into churches.
The British Museum has large impressive pieces of actual temples within its huge building, not just artefacts in the sense of “idols” etc.
If you are going to separate the importance of the site of a temple and of the stonework of a temple and of the spirit of a temple, if “Babylon” need not be in Mesopotamia at all, then surely the geography of the signing of the Treaty of Rome loses its significance ?
Rome and Babylon could have dwelt in any municipal building in Lisbon.
Paul-Henri Spaak took a different view. And it’s what the Eurocrats believe their project is about which counts.
Interesting. It’s all now a question of the psychology of Eurocrats.
Some of your readers, and a lot of American Christians (though not, one assumes, the majority) think of dangerous “spirits” like Baal as almost material in nature.
I have never been clear how much spirits are supposed to be purely abstract ( like “team spirit”, or any spirit which is similar to “good morale”), and how much they are supposed to be almost physical or material, like a “ghost” which you might hope to prove is really there rather than imagined. Jonas Clark, for exmple, writes a lot about the “Jezebel Spirit”, and this certainly seems to be envisaged as a real entity, although it gets around a lot.
I suspect as well as those who really do have a Jezebel spirit, there are plenty who are capable of acting in that way purely on their own volition – or are they?
It is quite curious how a mood can affect a sports team. I am constantly amazed how a cricket team can have a batting collapse or an epidemic of fielding errors when that game is based on purely individual actions.
Their collective mindset and even your individual attitude either verbally expressed or in thought affects the outcome. As it is written:
Prov 18:21 Death and life are in the power of the tongue:
Prov 23:7 For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he:
There is a spiritual dimension in the value of staying positive. After all, the two Israelite spies who said they could enter Canaan did so. And the ten who said they couldn’t, didn’t:
Numb 13:30 And Caleb stilled the people before Moses, and said, Let us go up at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcome it. 31 But the men that went up with him said, We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we.
Num 14:37 Even those men that did bring up the evil report upon the land, died by the plague before the LORD. 38 But Joshua the son of Nun, and Caleb the son of Jephunneh, which were of the men that went to search the land, lived.
Rox G is the same as Rox. My picture had been lost again, but has returned. Actually, I never coined “Rox G” rather than Rox.
You yourself have created two different accounts on two different email addresses.
Getting back to that building in Rome, I think many English people are unaware that it is a municipal building which is primarily set aside for grand occasions, rather like the Mansion House, and of particular age and grandeur, rather like Westminster Hall. When not in use as such, it is open to the public as part of the Capitoline Museums, but this particular chamber is a “museum” in the French and Italian sense of the publicly accessible rooms of a chateau or palace. In its primary function, it was the natural place to sign a treaty if the treaty was to be signed in Rome. The Waterloo Chamber at Windsor Castle is the same kind of place —- usually part of “the museum”, but used at least once a year for banquets etc. If a French (or German or Russian) head of state is entertained there, is has no significance as a reminder of the battle of Waterloo.
I read: ‘The room is lined with portraits of the monarchs, commanders and statesmen from the alliance that defeated Napoleon.’
No, Paul-Henri Spaak knew exactly what he was doing.
Thank you Stephen for your very detailed informative article. Thank God, that there are people like you who are bold in speaking out & allowing us laymen to understand what is going on in Parliament, where there is so much deception by the Prime Minister. God bless the work you do.
What I get from all of this is Mrs May is incapable of running the country. This is a man’s job, and quite frankly it serves them right for being so politically correct they voted May in as PM. Even Labour have not gone this far, despite the popular view that PC came from the left, we see the Cons just as enthusiastic and possible even more so. What has happened to Conservatism?
Of course this is inevitable. A man would drive a fair deal and have some fight in him. I knew May would make a dog’s dinner of her time in office, but that’s what the stupid people of this country want. They do not learn, and I believe the main trouble is they are all susceptible to brainwashing unless they boot their TV out and cancel their subscriptions to the media cartel.
Actually this is what I have done. I do not listen to it anymore. Actually this blog is excellent as it lets one know what is going on truthfully and without any spin. I’ve always said to people, what is needed in this country is for the good men and women to take over the media and offer a better service. What we get in the mainstream is a stitch-up. We get lies and general evil, and it feels so unclean.
So a big thanks to Steven for keeping us up to date. I’m finding these articles very helpful.
So you see Mrs May as a stupid woman, Andrew?
the Bible says the wife should be a helper for the husband, and should submit to their husbands (not submit to all men). Feminists, as most women and even men are these days, are absolutely outraged and horrified by this idea, although it was pretty much accepted before the cultural revolutions of the 1950s and 60s. I believe studies show that we were mostly happier then, I believe it is God’s order, God over the man, the man over his wife.
The women, imo, should mostly be at home looking after the house and the kids, cooking etc. Although it is not a case of forcing anyone to do anything, they should not, usually, be in the workplace, they’re not suited for it. They may make good nurses, etc (they seem to prefer the “caring” professions), but how they can combine working full-time and running a home, their primary responsibility imo, is beyond me. Probably why they seem so stressed-out most of the time. The kids are farmed out to be looked after by strangers, in “childcare”, whilst the women join the ranks of the wage-slaves. Most people who have worked for a woman boss don’t like it, even women will say they don’t like working for a woman boss. There are few men who would make a good PM, very few women, if any, imo. So I agree with Andrew.
Eccl 7:28 Which yet my soul seeketh, but I find not: one man among a thousand have I found; but a woman among all those have I not found.
Your site seems to have lost my earlier reply to this question.
The answer is no. I do not automatically adopt the position of the opposition if I have a criticism of a party. The stupid ones are the electorate, because no party would get anywhere without their support and, they believe in voting for the lesser of two evils, where I do not. They seem to think a woman would be kinder and more compassionate etc. What happens is when a woman is out of her depth they very often try and cover it up via dishonesty. She is out of her depth.
I recommend Richard North’s “EU Referendum” blog. He devotes his life to study of this subject. Our Lord said that the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light. His blog seems to be a case in point. Spiritual insight is necessary but it does not substitute for the knowledge it needs to be the insight into.
I note that Andrew C thinks that voting for the lesser of two evils is stupid. Would he care to explain why? The alternative is to have no influence which party governs. We will get one of them, or a coalition as now, whether we vote or not. There is no “None of the above” option. What gets up my nose is politicians who win elections claiming to have a mandate. That is a lie for which they are responsible.
As for this discussion on gender, as far as I can see stupidity is no respecter of gender.
You are right John. But men seem to say ‘stupid woman’ and women ‘stupid man’, and Captain Mainwaring ‘stupid boy’, so it seems we like to attach some gender or age specific personal noun to the stupidity adjective. But I think it is far nicer to say, as the wonderful little dog lady does in Nick Park’s Creature Comforts (Dogs v Cats), when her husband, who he casts as a fat cat, suggests one can throw a cat at a burglar, ‘That was a silly thing to say.’
There is in my view a spiritual side to this voting business. I see it the same way when I’m in a shop. Your vote is like your money. You should only vote for good things, as it is like your personal endorsement. I’ll boycott a shop if it is using my money to promote evil.
OK so back to the voting system, lets say all the parties are strongly PC and you know this practice is evil and ungodly. Well you sit it out, and supposing many others followed your example. We most likely would have a prime minister, but say only 10% of the country voted for it. I’d say that almost certainly there would be another election very soon and with a new set of candidates. Perhaps not, but then the next one only gets in by 10%. You see, it would be like the fall of Rome.
So this is why they all push people into voting. That is their greatest fear, but they have little to worry about in this country because so many are just so obedient and do what they are told, most likely like a herd of animals all moving in the same direction.
There’s another point as well. Perhaps there is a small party you agree with. Well vote for that. It probably wont get into power if you do, but it is your endorsement and you have told them what you want. It will have an effect and it will help that party achieve long term success.
The man to lead this exit of the EU is really Jacob Rees-Mogg in my view. He knows what he is doing and has the experience to back it up with. It’s because up until recently he had a real world job and he was very good at it. He is also very intelligent. Our problem and why he is not running it is because the cartel want us to be chained to the EU forever, especially by the time it gets really radical. They want us locked into it.
The idea of only 10% of people voting is interesting. Supposing it ever happened it might be taken as a vote against democracy. The majority would appear not to know what it wants, so the politicians might take that as carte blanche.
As far as I know most of the Christian organisations that speak into politics urge Christians to vote but are very strict in not saying for whom. The question whether we should vote or not needs more thought than it gets.
If politicians take an election victory as a mandate or an endorsement we should complain very loudly.
Only 10% of people voting might mean that only 10% think that they know enough to decide, and on many issues that is certainly the case. This is probably not “politically correct” of me, but I am not at all in favour of encouraging people to vote if they don’t much want to. If a relative handful of people have spent months reading up on all the details and searching their hearts on whether (say) it would be for better or worse that we should send soldiers to Syria, what is the point of bussing in millions of people who have simply been told to vote one way or the other by sensational stories in the Daily Express and the Sun the day before ?
John misses the point that “the politicians” who take power after an election are not always the same politicians ! They are the ones who have been chosen by the people who bothered to vote, and this does indeed give them some right to go ahead with their policies. I’m sorry if that sounds simple and elementary, but it is how it’s supposed to work. We all know that democracy is not perfect, but I don’t think any of us have come up with anything better, any more than Churchill did.
sorry Stephen, I realise now that your comment was referring to Comrade Corbyn’s alleged (I believe now denied) comment about Teresa May(?).
I was somewhat “triggered”, I’m going now to try to find a safe space: hopefully they’ll have some videos of cute puppies, or some colouring books, or something, to restore me to some vestige of normalcy. Oh but hang on, its only liberals who can be “triggered” by nasty, disgusting “conservative” views that they need to be protected from, isn’t it? It doesn’t work the other way round! Somone said that conservatives think liberals are stupid, but liberals think conservatives are evil: whoever said it, they got it about right, imo.
Hey! Remember Deborah the Judge! (Now, she wasn’t a stupid woman.)
And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time. (Judges 4:4)
I think she lacks the qualities of leadership which are required. Women make extremely bad leaders, and I notice these days it is the trend to employ women as the “manager” in the workplace. For me, I will not do such a job, so I vote with my feet. I’ve had a lot of trouble in this department, and recently I got a woman judge in a tax dispute case I was involved with and she was totally corrupt. I appealed against her and won, and now have a tax law in my name where it makes the woman look like an idiot. As for May’s abilities in cooking up a nice Christmas dinner, well perhaps she can. I’m not commenting on her overall intelligence, just the mental capacity to lead the country and those skills required for it. I’m sure everyone knows this anyway, even if it is just something easy like planning some trip with your wife. They do not have the kind of brain which can logically plan something.
Bless you, bro’!
Thanks for this timely article & providing quick access to the petition. We can’t forget the ‘spiritual’ dimension of the ungodly EU’s hold on Europe and the UK-thinking of the video’s you made in 2016 from Brussels on this-Most Brexit folk won’t have any insight- it’s not only about trade etc-so it’s for Biblically informed believers to petition God in prayer to rescue us from this ungodly EU system and the coming plans.
There is also the planned sell-out of defence. after we leave the EU, but cunningly during the transitional period!! Hopefully, this can be stopped as MPs’ awareness of this issue is growing, For further details see’ Veterans for Britain.’
With there being very little likelihood of Mrs May’s deal going through, the end result is still anyone’s guess. They have already warred off the petition with a stringed up reply. It is what they do not say. It is good that we have a sovereign God to plead to. He hears our prayers and knows the outcome. Hr rules and overrules.
What are the Conservatives up to? they chose a remain voter to be PM and then secured a confidence vote in her. They have themselves to blame for the chaos.
Merkel and May could well be working on a plan to bring back the UK into the EU Fold.
If the following is as much a threat to a no deal as I think it is, then I think it’s another date for the calendar – 8 January.
If the amendment to the Finance Bill, tabled by Yvette Cooper et al today passes into law, then it seems that it could prevent a no deal.
Apparently, the amendment would have the effect of preventing the Treasury removing reference to EU legislation regarding tax matters on leaving the EU unless:
• a Brexit deal with the EU was fully agreed,
• there had been a decision to extend the Article 50 process or
• the House of Commons specifically voted to accept a no-deal Brexit, (an unlikely event!)
Therefore, one of the effects of the amendment would be to rule out a no deal. According to ITV’s Robert Peston, this vote will be on 8 Jan.
Taken from a video by Jeff Taylor who posts daily info re Brexit:
I don’t know but I think this amendment, if passed, would alter the previous position of the default no deal only being avoided by ratification of a deal or revoking Art 50.
I cannot see Yvette Cooper’s amendment succeeding, even if it is called. But it shows how passionate , or desperate, the Remoaners are.
I don’t see how a LAW preventing there being no-deal can guarantee a deal.
It’s like the pious wish that a LAW preventing the flying of drones within 5 miles of an airport can guarantee that disruption by drones will never happen again. Rather naive !
© 2012 Christian Voice UK
Made with by Graphene Themes.