Some recent events on the Church scene indicate that the Church of England will eventually have to split. Alongside other denominations and provinces in the Western world there seems to be a determination to abandon the Bible’s teaching.

The Anglican Church in Canada has just approved same sex marriage’ the Episcopalian Church in the United States has already done so. The Church of Scotland and the United Reformed Church in England have also done so, and many within the Church of England are anxious to do so. Thank God there are still within all those Churches who will remain faithful to Scripture, remembering if you challenge the Bible you are challenging God. Our Christian brothers and sisters in Africa, Far East, and South America are still faithful to God's Word.

At the recent General Synod a meeting was held to discuss the issue of same sex marriage. Titled ‘shared conversation’, it might more appropriately named, ‘biased conversation’.

Each speaker was allotted eight minutes to present their case, and the first to speak kept to that agreement when presenting the argument against the issue. The two following speakers ignored the time limit and were allowed to do so for twelve and significantly they were the last speakers, which is generally considered an advantage for a cause.

There was no opportunity offered to challenge what was said when claims were made that sexual orientation was a given fact, and any scientific research to the contrary was stated to be a non consideration.. Whilst the Bible unequivocally condemn same sex relationships, it was incredulously stated that only referred to ‘bad sex’, whatever that is supposed to be. The writings of Paul were of course cavalierly dismissed.

Well has it been stated "Of course, we can and we must relate to one another in our shared humanity, but we can't stay together if the church wants to bless what is not holy."

The LGBT lobby may be small, but it is incredibly powerful. However, in fairness it must be acknowledged that many people in same sex relationships were content with having civil unions, and this was generally accepted by all society, it was only the activists, and men like David Cameron anxious to win political points who forced the issue of so called ‘marriage’.

I stated at the time of his ‘passionately described’ legislation he may one day regret such action in overruling a divine decree, despite having through marriage a relation in such a situation. Is it just coincidence that despite winning a stunning and sensational election against all odds, he had only a year to enjoy it before having notice to move out within a matter of hours?