Freedom of Speech and the current confusion and  obscurity regarding an adequate definition of Extremism

This morning I read this post by Stephen Kneale at The Arbour. Later, I read Isaiah 54:17. What follows below are commentaries from Albert Barnes & John Gill on this verse in Isaiah. They are quite lengthy, but given the apparent progress the enemies of The Gospel of The Lord Christ are making it seems somewhat providential to post them here. And let’s be clear, the defense of Traditional Marriage isn’t about battering Homosexuals or anyone else. What it is really about is the authority of the Bible and among other things what it means to be a Christian. What is a Christian is an ongoing question that will not and is not going to go away. Why? Because sinful man is forever trying to find a way of Salvation that keeps man on the throne. The cry of sinful man, no matter how polite it can seem, is ‘We will not have this man (The Lord Jesus) rule over us. (See Luke 19:14) The Freedom to express any other view or belief other than the one you are told to express, particularly on SSM or Abortion, is starting to look like and feel like extremism. If it looks like a duck….

Here’s the text of Isaiah 54:17. ‘no weapon that is fashioned against you shall succeed, and you shall refute every tongue that rises against you in judgment. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD and their vindication from me, declares the LORD’ (ESV). The comments of Barnes & Gill follow.

No weapon that is formed – No instrument of war, no sword, or spear; no instrument of persecution or torture that is made by the smith, Isa 54:16.

Shall prosper – On the meaning of this word, see the notes at Isa 52:13. The sense here is, that it shall not have final and ultimate prosperity. It might be permitted for a time to appear to prosper – as persecutors and oppressors have done; but there would not be final and complete success.

And every tongue – No one shall be able to injure you by words and accusations. If a controversy shall arise; if others reproach you and accuse you of imposture and deceit, you will be able ultimately to convince them of error, and, by manifestation of the truth, to condemn them. The language here is derived probably from courts of justice (see the notes at Isa 41:1); and the idea is, that truth and victory, in every strife of words, would be on the side of the church. To those who have watched the progress of discussions thus far on the subject of the true religion, it is needless to say that this has been triumphantly fulfilled. Argument, sophism, ridicule, have all been tried to overthrow the truth of the Christian religion. Appeals have been made to astronomy, geology, antiquities, history, and indeed to almost every department of science, and with the same want of success. Poetry has lent the charm of its numbers; the grave historian has interwoven with the thread of his narrative covert attacks and sly insinuations against the Bible; the earth has been explored to prove that’ He who made the world and revealed its age to Moses was mistaken in its age;’ and the records of Oriental nations, tracing their history up cycles of ages beyond the Scripture account of the creation of the world, have been appealed to, but thus far in all these contests ultimate victory has declared in favor of the Bible. And no matter from what quarter the attack has come, and no matter how much learning and talent have been evinced by the adversaries of the Bible, God has raised up some Watson, or Lardner, or Chalmers, or Buckland, or Cuvier, or Wiseman, to meet these charges, and to turn the scales in favor of the cause of truth. They who are desirous of examining the effects of the controversy of Christianity with science, and the results, can find them detailed with great learning and talent in Dr. Wiseman’s Lectures on the connection between Science and Revealed Religion, Andover, 1837.

This is the heritage – The inheritance which awaits those who serve God is truth and victory. It is not gold and the triumph of battle. It is not the laurel won in fields of blood. But it is, the protection of God in all times of trouble; his friendship in all periods of adversity; complete victory in all contests with error and false systems of religion; and preservation when foes rise up in any form and endeavor to destroy the church, and to blot out its existence and its name.

And their righteousness is of me – Or rather, ‘this is the righteousness, or the justification which they obtain of me; this is that which I impart to them as their justification.’ The idea is not that their righteousness is of him, but that this justification or vindication from him is a part of their inheritance and their portion. (Albert Barnes December 1, 1798 – December 24, 1870)

No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper,…. All weapons of war, as the Targum, which are made with a design to hurt and destroy the people of God, shall be rendered useless; not one of them shall prosper to the advantage of their enemies, or so as to answer their design; nor to the hurt and prejudice, ruin and destruction, of the saints:

and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment; that shall raise any calumny upon thee, or bring any charge against thee, or enter into a lawsuit with thee, litigate a point with thee in any court of judicature, or claim, in right and law, a power, authority, and dominion over thee, as the pope of Rome does over the consciences of men:

thou shalt condemn; disprove and roll off the calumny, refute the charge and accusation, put to silence the clamours and pretences of wicked men, carry the cause against them, and shake off the yoke of bondage they would bring them under; and, instead of being condemned by them, condemn them. By “weapon” may be meant all the attempts made by force to ruin the interest and church of Christ in the world, such as the bloody persecutions of the Roman emperors, who, though they made sad havoc of the professors of Christianity, and designed hereby to have rooted it out of the world, and thought they should have accomplished it, yet could not do it; so far from it, that the Christians yet more and more increased, insomuch that it became a common saying, that the blood of the martyrs was the seed of the church; also the wars of the Papists with the Albigenses and Waldenses, and all the cruel methods they have taken by fire and faggot, and the bloody inquisition, to hinder the growth of what they call heresy; yet all have been in vain, a reformation has taken place, and many nations have embraced the truth, and shook off the yoke of Popery; together with all their efforts since to crush the Protestant interest; and though the kings of the earth will be stirred up, and gather together to the battle of the Lord God Almighty, they will not succeed, but be overcome and slain, and the beast and false prophet at the head of them will be taken and cast alive into the lake of fire: and by the “tongue” may be designed the edicts of the Pagan emperors, forbidding the exercise of the Christian religion, and threatening the preachers and professors of it with imprisonment, confiscation of goods, and death itself; and the anathemas, bulls, and interdicts of the popes of Rome, as well as the reproaches, scandals, and calumnies uttered by the emissaries of that church against all that depart from it; together with the errors and heresies of false teachers of all sorts in all ages of the world, which, though levelled against the faith and doctrine of the church of Christ, have not been able to subvert it, nor ever will:

this is the heritage of the servants of the Lord; this, with all that is said in this chapter, is the part, portion, and privilege, that such shall enjoy who serve the Lord Christ, and not antichrist; they shall be treated rather as sons than as servants, and have an inheritance assigned them; not only protection from all enemies, and absolution from all charges, but they shall receive the reward of the inheritance in heaven, that which is incorruptible and undefiled, and reserved there, since they serve the Lord Christ:

and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord; the vindication of their righteousness, of their cause, and of their character; or the reward of their righteous works in a way of grace; even all that righteousness and true holiness that is in them, and that righteousness which is imputed to them, and by which they are justified, are from the Lord; by which they are secured from all the charges of law and justice, and, from all the accusations of men and devils, and which will answer for them in a time to come, and acquit them at the bar of God before men and angels; see Rom 8:33. (John Gill 23 November 1697 – 14 October 1771)

A Bad Day for Free Speech

My off the cuff comments:

It’s funny thing to carry on as if nothing is happening, or has happened. Most will though, and simply carry on as if nothing has happened. But while we all (rightly) go about our daily business Free Speech & The Freedom of Religion has taken another battering. The ruling over Asher’s Bakery means the end of conscience. It’s clear from todays ruling that conscience, that most precious gift from God, must be aligned with another’s subjective view of how conscience is to be informed. As Christians we believe our conscience is to be informed primarily by a right application of the Word of God – The Bible. There can only be one, ultimately, objective source of ‘right & wrong’ of morality. In our day we are seeing the last vestiges of a ‘right’ means to inform the conscience being dismantled. While the Word of God and the Christian faith continues to be sidelined we ask what is the standard to be applied. It does appear to be the case, that where a conflict occurs between ‘rights’ it will in most cases automatically defer to the Anti-Christian position. But the reality is this; without an objective view of morality supplied by the Word of God the West collectively will slowly but surely itself be sidelined in favour of other civilisations. There is no ‘God-given’ ‘right’ to the West. It will eventually implode on itself. That doesn’t mean the West will disappear, or cease to be a strong economy or the place where many people will seek to find refuge. But it does mean morality will be defined ‘on the hoof’. The situation, or money, or power, or personality, or sexual orientation will decide on all moral cases. This is what must happen when the Bible is abandoned.

James White 3-part Video / Audio response to David Gushee

Dr White of Alpha & Omega Ministries has concluded his response to Dr David Gushee. I recommend you all watch / listen to these. With Churches collapsing and falling over themselves to affirm Same Sex Marriage and the LGBTQ totalitarian ideology Christians need to be prepared. I watched part of a BBC Q & A session last evening (05/05/2015) with Northern Ireland leaders as part of the election coverage over here in the UK. They just were floundering to affirm LGBTQ rights. There was a Christian in the audience that spoke out and despite assurances to the contrary it was obvious his fears will probably be confirmed. Among words used and forcefully expressed by members of the audience were Bigot & Homophobe. As Dr White says ‘it isn’t a slippery slope it’s a cliff’ and we are teetering on the edge looking over. O Lord our God in wrath remember mercy (Habakkuk 3:2). Videos below. (Go to the bottom of this page for Audio Links) I don’t know Dr White but I take him to be a sane level-headed man not given to scare-mongering. He’s far more aware of what’s going on than I am so I take his warnings seriously.

Video 1 – Responding to Dr. David Gushee’s “Reformation Project” Presentation
‘I began a multi-part, full response to Dr. David Gushee’s presentation at the Reformation Project conference back in 2014 on today’s 90 minute long program.  Gushee has taken the position of “lead ally” and scholar in support of the “gay Christian” movement, asserting that the church is guilty of hurting her “sexual minorities.”  It is important to understand the arguments Gushee is putting forth, for we will all be hearing them repeated in the months and years to come.  I managed to get 22 minutes into the hour long presentation today, and will continue the response on Thursday’s program.’

Video 2 – Continued Response to Dr. David Gushee (Part 2)
‘Here is another 90 minutes of response to Dr. David Gushee in response to his presentation at the Reformation Project back in 2014.  I only got through about 12 minutes today as I took more time to expand upon particular points. If you are enjoying this response and finding it useful and edifying, please, share it with others!’

Video 3 – Finishing Up Review/Rebuttal of David Gushee “Reformation Project” Presentation
‘Finished up a five hour response to David Gushee on his presentation identifying the biblical view of homosexuality as a message of “contempt.” We hope to put the entire five hours into a single audio file available for download.  Given the recent events at the Supreme Court, this is a vital discussion.’

Audio Links Below
(I’ll try to change this to a single file when I can)

Response 1

Response 2

Response 3

Does Scripture forbid same-sex relationships? Robert Gagnon vs Jayne Ozanne

The latest (25/04/2015) ‘Unbelievable’ program hosted by Justin Brierly tackled the question Does Scripture forbid same-sex relationships? [The short answer is yes BTW]

‘Prof Robert Gagnon has become a well-known voice advocating the traditional biblical view on sexuality. In a highly charged show he debates the scriptural issues on sexuality with Jayne Ozanne, the director of Accepting Evangelicals who came out as gay earlier this year.’

I would recommend listening to the program, if for no other reason than to see the vacuity of the LGBTQ case. The case that Jayne Ozanne put forward anyway. I would summarise each position like this:

Robert Gagnon: The Bible clearly forbids Same-Sex marital relationships as I have demonstrated.

Jayne Ozanne: I don’t care what the Bible text says, It’s what I feel God is doing in my life and is about love.

That just about sums it up. And if you don’t believe me….

Go to the program page HERE.

Just remember as the catechism states, The Scriptures are our only rule for faith and practice. If the Bible is usurped in the way Jayne Ozanne has demonstrated; what now is our rule for faith and practice? Authority is the heart of the issue. It always has been so.

Responding to Dr. David Gushee’s “Reformation Project” Presentation – Part 1

From Dr Whites Blog page:

I began a multi-part, full response to Dr. David Gushee’s presentation at the Reformation Project conference back in 2014 on today’s 90 minute long program.  Gushee has taken the position of “lead ally” and scholar in support of the “gay Christian” movement, asserting that the church is guilty of hurting her “sexual minorities.”  It is important to understand the arguments Gushee is putting forth, for we will all be hearing them repeated in the months and years to come.  I managed to get 22 minutes into the hour long presentation today, and will continue the response on Thursday’s program.

Link to the page with links to the Audio.

Marriage in the Manifestos

From The Coalition for Marriage
Dear marriage supporter,As the election approaches I thought you might like to know what the political parties are saying about marriage.David Cameron highlights same-sex marriage in his manifesto, saying it“helped drive forward equality and strengthened the institution of marriage”. This is despite the fact that most of his backbenchers voted against it.The Labour Party correctly say that it was their votes which got gay marriage onto the statute book.At the time, both Conservative and Labour Party leaderships brought huge pressure to bear on their MPs to back gay marriage. By contrast the Liberal Democrats seem to have had a genuinely free vote. But all three parties now talk about same-sex marriage as official policy and pledge to go further.

Same-sex marriage is not mentioned in the UKIP, SNP or Plaid Cymru manifestos.

Both the Conservatives and UKIP back the married couples’ allowance, which also applies to same-sex couples in a legal marriage or civil partnership. Labour, the Lib Dems, and the SNP pledge to scrap the married couples’ allowance.

Extracts from the manifestos are given below.

Over four out of five MPs from the last Parliament are seeking re-election. You should have received an email from us last month telling you how your MP voted on redefining marriage.

Ask all your candidates whether people should be punished for believing in traditional marriage. Our 30 Cases leaflet highlights some examples of concern.

We must keep on raising the issue of marriage because we know it really matters to the future of our country. The people elected on 7 May will make crucial decisions in the future, such as whether to reduce or increase legal protection for freedom of conscience and freedom of speech.

Yours sincerely,

Colin HartColin Hart
Campaign Director
Coalition for Marriage

Extracts from the manifestos

Conservative Manifesto 2015

  • “We will back the institution of marriage in our society, enabling married couples to transfer £1,060 of their tax-free income to their husband or wife, where the highest earner is a basic rate taxpayer. This applies to civil partnerships too”. (page 27)
  • “Our historic introduction of gay marriage has helped drive forward equality and strengthened the institution of marriage. But there is still more to do, and we will continue to champion equality for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender people.” (page 46)

Labour Manifesto 2015

  • “We will create a fairer tax system, helping those on middle and lower incomes by introducing a lower 10p starting rate of tax, paid for by ending the Conservatives’ Marriage Tax Allowance.” (page 18)

Labour Party LGBT Manifesto 2015

  • “Since Harold Wilson’s Government finally decriminalised homosexuality in 1967, Labour has continued to lead the fight for LGBT equality. We abolished the hateful section 28, equalised the age of consent, gave statutory rights for NHS fertility treatment for lesbians, created civil partnerships and delivered the votes that put equal marriage on the statute book.” (page 3)

Liberal Democrat Manifesto 2015

  • Under ‘A Record of Delivery’: “Introduced equal marriage for gay and lesbian couples”. (page 105)
  • “A fair society should treat its citizens equally and with dignity. In this Parliament, thanks to Liberal Democrats in government, there have been key advances in the fight for equality – like introducing same-sex marriage and banning age discrimination.” (page 105)
  • The Liberal Democrats say they will: Promote international recognition of same sex marriages and civil partnerships as part of a comprehensive International LGBT Rights Strategy that supports the cause of decriminalising homosexuality in other countries.” (page 107)
  • They will also: “Give legal rights and obligations to cohabiting couples in the event of relationship breakdown or one partner dying without a will.” (page 107)

UKIP Manifesto 2015

  • In the next Parliament, UKIP pledge to “increase the transferable personal tax allowance for married couples and civil partners”. (page 5) Again, UKIP will: “Increase the transferable tax allowance for married couples and civil partners to £1,500.” (page 7)

SNP Manifesto 2015

  • “We will also look to release additional resources by backing a series of revenue raising measures…reversal of the married couples’ tax allowance. (page 8)

Plaid Cymru Manifesto 2015 – no mention of same-sex marriage or marriage tax breaks

Green Party Manifesto 2015

  • The Green Party manifesto pledges to: “Legislate to remedy inequality in pension inheritance for same-sex marriage partners and same-sex civil partners.” (page 26)

Is the ‘Gay’ Agenda Totalitarian?

Is the ‘Gay’ agenda Totalitarian?

Answer: Yes.

Here’s the definition copied and pasted from


[toh-tal-i-tair-ee-uh n]


1. of or relating to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life.

2. exercising control over the freedom, will, or thought of others; authoritarian; autocratic. (One might add, over the conscious of other as well – my comment)

Those  two definitions pretty much cover it.

If you follow the Wiki totalitarian link above you will read the line below

‘a totalitarian regime attempts to control virtually all aspects of the social life including economy, education, art, science, private life and morals of citizens.’

This is exactly what is happening.

And to prove it, try disagreeing, preaching, having a contrary view or holding to a ‘traditional’, better known as Biblical, view of marriage. It is now required that everyone ‘affirms’ and embraces the LGBTQ lifestyle or else.

Letter to my MP – Same-Sex marriage

Not sure if I’ll get arrested for this, but here’s the letter I just sent to my MP….

Dear Mr ——–,

Given the recent anti-Christian manifestations of just where the Same-Sex Marriage issue has taken us, I thought an email to my Member of Parliament might be appropriate.

I’ve appreciated the fact that you have replied to earlier emails over this issue even though there seemed, to me, to be a veiled threat within them.

The manifestations I refer to are the Ashers Bakery case in Northern Ireland and the Red Cross case dismissal. Just to note: Same-Sex marriage is not legal in NI and the protest by Bryan Barkley was before the law had been passed here. Both cases could, even should, I would think, be open to a counter-claim of discrimination. But I don’t see the Government leading on this. The reason is obvious. The UK Government has made its position clear in that it opposes ANY disagreement with Homosexuality / Same-Sex marriage and would rather ‘celebrate’ an LGBTQ lifestyle.

To me this has been and will be a Vote-Loser. I have voted Conservative many times in the past but I’m no longer able to do so. Regarding Free Speech & Freedom of Religion, I believe Theresa May is a dangerous person believing in neither. That’s Atheists as well saying that about the Home Secretary.

The only party that I’m able to vote for with a good conscience is UKIP. Yes it might be (probably will be) a wasted vote, or even a vote for Labour as it were, but my conscience will be clear. Others will, but I can’t vote for a party that forces me to go against my conscience. At least UKIP seem to understand the need for Freedom of Speech and seeks to uphold it. Unlike the current HS who seeks to deny it. Since my conscience is being assaulted, abused and denied by the Conservative Party (not necessarily individual Conservative MP’s) I have no choice but to vote for someone else.

I’ve wavered at the Ballot box in the past and when push came to shove I have voted Conservative. But not this time. There will be no wavering.

The thing is MP’s generally think money is the only issue. I don’t have a particularly well paid job (???) but I’d prefer to have that and a clear conscience than loads of money. It’s not just the Same-Sex issue. It’s climate change, It’s the response to Islam and the whole politically correct agenda that’s helping to sink this country. If someone wants to believe something else – fine. But I believe in robust dialogue. The Christian faith is abused EVERY SINGLE DAY in one way or another. David Cameron etc really don’t have the first clue about Islam or Christianity. He claims to be a Christian, but his actions clearly show him to be deceived at best. Maybe his advisor’s are feeding him false information.

To conclude. What I really want – I’ve said this before, but things continue to get worse, is a commitment by the Government to Free-Speech. Many Atheists get that and want the same. For believing the Bible, many an Atheist would tell me I’m sick, insane, deluded, stupid, even dangerous. I’m ok with that. That is their right. But I just might speak similarly about them.

I do not want to ‘affirm’ homosexuality (LGBTQ). The Bible is very clear in its condemnation of Homosexuality & Same-Sex marriage. The Bible calls it Sinful. The implications of denying this Biblical teaching is huge. I don’t think politicians quite understand what is at stake. Homosexuality is in one sense a non-issue. We are all sinners, all under the condemnation of God, all have broken the Law of God, all are in need of a Saviour. My sin will take me to hell just as much as a practising homosexual. But if I choose to say my sins are OK I haven’t just re-defined my sins, I have changed everything. God, the Bible, Jesus and every single Bible teaching and ALL morality becomes a wax-nose for me to fashion in any way I choose. Why not have a threesome marriage, or four, or five? I could marry and have sex with my mother, cousin, daughter, son, father. Everything is allowed. Why? Any moral authority for saying those things are wrong has been, or is in the process of being destroyed. Worst of all, if there is no sin, there is no need for a Saviour. There is no longer any good news – no Gospel. This is why (some) Christians are making a noise about this. It’s not simply a lifestyle choice.

I’ll leave it there. If you have read this far, thank you for your time. Sadly I will not be voting Conservative at the next election. And if UKIP get on the ‘Gay’ bandwagon I will not be voting for them either.

Kind Regards,

I’ll let you know if I get a response.