Equality Leglisation

This 'Equality Legislation' championed by the Minister for Women and Equality, Harriet Harman, appears to be aimed against religion in general and Christianity in particular. There seems to be a christian phobia, destabilising secular humanism to the extent that they run desperately for government protection.

What is the humanist really afraid of from Biblical Christianity? Surely they cannot be afraid of Christians, who are mere mortals like themselves. Perhaps they are afraid of God's Word exposing humanities true nature, as sinful and rebellious toward Almighty God.

The 'Equality Legislation' appears to miss a fundamental point concerning Biblical Christianity. When a person receives the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour, they find a spiritual standing in Christ. This 'standing' in Christ sets them apart unto God, they are found as believers, they are no longer the slaves of sin, they are found new creatures in Christ.

The saved sinner does not cease to be human when they are saved, but they no longer are found as unbelievers. So it is Christ that makes the difference among humanity, there are those who receive Christ and there are those who reject Christ. This is exactly where the term' Equality' does not fit. It is simply wrong to try to force a merger of unbelievers with believers, where then, is the right of the believer to remain separate from sin upheld?

Equality legislation, aimed at destroying Christian faith and practice, is unfair in principal, and inappropriate in a democracy.

The humanist society is ever active in lobbying for change in government legislation to the demise of Biblical Christianity. They may succeed in using the law of the land to their own advantage for a time, as Christians are persecuted, but for them to stand before God's judgement throne without a Mediator and to answer for their inhumanity to God's believing people, will be met with less success.

It is interesting to note that 'inequality' has always been the charge against God and His Word; (Ezekiel 18:25) 'Yet ye say, The way of the LORD is not equal. Hear now .... Is not my way equal? are not your ways unequal?'

In order for 'Equality Legislation' to be considered by any government, then it must not be found to be discriminatory; otherwise it becomes inequality.

Where Have All The Believers Gone?

Here is a question asked by the Guardians’ Andrew Brown.

''Where have all believers gone?''

Perhaps it would be best to identify the term 'believer.'
A believer, from a Christian perspective, is a person that has 'believed on the Lord Jesus Christ as Saviour and Redeemer', to the salvation of their immortal soul.

So a believer is a saved person, one that has called on the name of the Lord for forgiveness of sin, and is found a new creature in Christ. As to the question of the apparent decline in numbers, this is always problematic. When persecution or adversity arises against Christians and their principles, quite frequently the head counting starts.

This is precisely what happened in the reign of Ahab and Jezebel in Israel of old. Elijah the prophet found the persecution difficult, and thought within himself, that there were few that served the LORD; but even he was wrong, because the LORD said, ''Yet I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees of which have not bowed unto Baal, and every mouth which hath not kissed him.'' (1Kin19:18)

The number of 'believers' then are known only unto God, man can but offer an estimation, accurate or otherwise.

Are Christians Prejudiced Against Homosexuals?

The following heading was carried by The Guardian, in the CIF Belief section.

''The prejudice against gay people among conservative Christians is a cultural attitude not reflected in Jesus' teachings''

When the name of Jesus is mentioned I think that it is good to remember that He, is, was and ever shall be God. He is God the Son, eternally begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth. Sometimes the phrase, 'Jesus teachings', seems to detract from the indisputable fact, that this is none other than the Son of God speaking, so therefore we are faced with the the actual living Word of God.

The born again Christian, will certainly have no prejudice against a homosexual nor for that matter against any other type of sinner; the sinners sin will offend them, but the sinner will not. To suggest that abhorrence of sin is a cultural attitude among those that have been saved by grace, is wrong. When a person is reconciled unto God through Christ, they are found to be new creatures in Christ, they discover that what offends God will now offend them. This has nothing at all to do with culture, but it has everything to do with the work of the Holy Spirit of God, which is called sanctification.

To suggest that abhorrence of sin is not a reflection of scriptural teaching is quite absurd.

'Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity' (Hab1:13)

The Bible and the Sin of Homosexuality.

‘Is The Bible Anti-Gay’?

This was a question placed in the Guardian today, and I would like to venture an answer.

The Holy Bible, which is the inerrant and infallible Word of God, does state clearly that homosexuality is sin. However, this is not the only sin that the Word of God condemns, as the following passage from 1st Corinthians ch6, explains;

9Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
11And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

By way of definition, sin, is any want of conformity unto or transgression of the law of God. So to answer the headline question, homosexuality is sin, and sin is an offence against God’s Word, which, if not repented of, will incur the wrath and judgment of Almighty God.

There was an answer published in the Guardian, to the headline question, which ran like this;

'So the answer to this question has two parts. Yes, the Bible condemns homosexual behaviour, as a threat to moral order. But the New Testament condemns something else as well: holy moralism. It announces an anti-legalistic revolution. It tells us we have to keep our moral thinking mobile, open-ended. The Bible sows the seed of the deconstruction of its own sexual moralism.'

My objection to this answer, as a Bible believer is as follows;

Of course the Bible does condemn homosexual behaviour as sin, which is an offence against, and transgression of God's Word. In the case of sin against God, the Bible declares that, 'the wages of sin is death', in other words sin is a culpable act and therefore will be judged by God.

The condemnation of sin is consistent through the entire cannon of Scripture, the Old as well as the New Testaments, as you point out. However, there is no abrogation of the moral law in the New Testament as you assert. None other than the Lord Jesus Christ Himself, made clear reference to the moral law, which is summarily comprehended in the ten commandments.

When you speak of 'an anti legalistic revolution' in the New Testament, the only thing that comes close to this parlance is the fulfilment of the law and the prophets in the person and work of Christ.

As for 'keeping our moral thinking mobile, open ended'; these are sentiments which are entirely foreign to the teaching of God's Word. Rather, the Bible states, 'Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:' (Phil2:5)

To imply that the 'Bible sows the seed of the deconstruction of its own sexual moralism', is to suggest that the Word of God is contradictory. While human language and terminology may alter with the passing of time, the Word of God and the interpretation thereof never alters. Sin is still sin, irrespective as to man's philosophy, whether past, present or future.

The Atheistic Laugh.

The Guardian carried this headline, 'We don't need God, we've got biscuits
If you're looking for a miracle, try laughter. That's as sacred as it gets in this world, says Charlie Brooker'

What falls under this head is an attempt by atheists to make a mockery out of Almighty God. There is a link between the article in the Guardian and a book entitled, 'The atheist guide to Christmas'. I wonder, what the atheist will do when their day of mockery is over, when they enjoy their final laugh at the expense of God and His redeemed.

What will the atheistic fool do, when that which they covertly fear the most confronts them; after denying the existence of God, after rejecting His repeated offers of mercy and grace, after mocking His Word, to find His existence to be a felt reality?

The Word of God declares, 'Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap'. It is sad for the atheist to mock away the day of grace, to laugh at God's every entreaty, to reject every offer of mercy, and then finally to realise that they were wrong, just as the door of opportunity closes in their face.

There will be nothing to laugh at or to scorn then, when fear catches up on them, they will call for help then, but alas, eternally too late. They will be paralyzed with fear when the tables are eternally turned. Proverbs chapter one puts it like this;

'24Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
25But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
26I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
27When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
28Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
29For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:
30They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.
31Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.
32For the turning away of the simple shall slay them, and the prosperity of fools shall destroy them.
33But whoso hearkeneth unto me shall dwell safely, and shall be quiet from fear of evil.'

Anti Social Behaviour.

There is a concerted effort to remove Biblical teaching from society, and to openly deny the existence of God, the end result of this is anti social behaviour. Any society deprived of the teaching and discipline which God's Word brings will inevitably be the poorer and the more badly behaved.

The natural man, left to himself, will sink deeper and deeper into sin and will engage in reproachful behaviour. The Word of God could be likened unto a life raft, which will carry all that climb aboard by faith, to finding peace with God through the Lord Jesus Christ. When a person is reconciled unto God through salvation, which is by grace alone and through Christ alone, then that person becomes a new creature in Christ. 'Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things have passed away; behold, all things are become new.' (2Cor5:17) The person that is saved by grace will be transformed from the old ways of sin and will live to God's glory in their community. When the apostle Paul preached, the cities of Corinth, Athens, Antioch and Philippi were transformed by the power of God's Word. When preachers like, Wesley, Whitfield, Fenney, Moody and Spurgeon brought the Word of God to the people, entire communities were transformed. Bad behaviour was replaced by God fearing, decent, law abiding and upright living.

Labour's Communities Secretary, John Denham, has announced a £10 million package, which is to be targeted at 130 local councils to tackle anti social behaviour. Can I say that this is a crying shame, to throw away tax payers money in a vain attempt to get society to behave better. No amount of money could ever lift a society out of the pit of sin, no amount of human effort could ever transform a life. If society is ever to be improved, if anti social behaviour is ever to be sensibly tackled there needs to be Divine, not governmental, intervention.

Humanism Set To Destroy Families.

Recently the final phase of the atheist bus campaign was launched by humanist activist Ariane Sherine. This atheist bill board campaign is set to challenge the idea that children can be labelled with their parents religion. Such is the obsession with humanists today, that they are now bent on destroying the right of families to enjoy civil and religious liberty.

I am speaking from a Christian point of view and take exception to the reckless and intrusive approach of secular humanism as it seeks to destroy Christian homes and families. Christian parents have a God given right and responsibility to bring their children into contact with the Word of God from the earliest days. I feel that it is morally wrong for any organization to sow the seeds of rebellion and discord among children in an attempt to convert them to atheism.

It is a privilege for children to be born into a family where the Word of God is honoured and obeyed. God the Son did not think it wrong to be born into a Jewish family, nor did He think it reprehensible to be called a Jew. Once more the Humanist movement pitch their human reasoning and experience above and beyond that of Almighty God.

The Bible teaches that, 'children are an heritage of the LORD' (Psalm127:3); furthermore the Word of God directs parents to teach their children the Scriptures, 'And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house,' (Deut6:7) In the New Testament, young Timothy was not ashamed, nor stigmatised to be brought up under the Word of God; (2Tim1:5) 'When I call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice; and I am persuaded that in thee also.'

Where these humanist posters appear, I appeal to all Christians to voice their objection and register their complaint, within the law, at every possible level so that our children and grandchildren be not converted to the anti God religion of atheism.

Humanist / Atheist Utopia.

Perhaps what humanists and atheists fail to understand is this; by removing God and His Word from society, this will lead to a spiritual vacuum, leaving the way open for eventual satanic occupation and control.

Personally, I am all for fair minded debate, but let's all face the simple facts; if secular humanists and atheists achieve their objectives, and all world God based religions are removed, what then? Will this create a humanistic or atheistic utopia? No, but what it will create, will be a platform or world stage unto which Antichrist will climb. There will be no barrier or defense structure at all then, against occult practice and full Satanic dominance. When Satanic forces bear rule, there would be no appeal to courts of human rights, there would be no evolutionary process to remove the oppression, there would be no power of human reasoning able to resist the force of evil, and, as for atheism, sadly after giving place to, it must surrender to, and worship the devil.

Without being alarmist, I am more convinced than ever before that we are perhaps, closer to the Great Tribulation period than anyone knows. This will be a time when Satan will appear to be in control for a short period, prior to the end of this age. Whatever the disposition of heart or mind of the people in such a coming time, worship of Satan will not be an option, it will be obligatory on pain of death.

'And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.' (Rev13:15)

Before you condemn this comment, as some type of apocalyptic, or eschatological rant, at least face the facts of the debate, and consider what the future would hold for a Godless state, or a Godless world.

The Vatican Star Gazers

The Times carried the headline recently,'alien life forms 'plausible' says Vatican astronomer.'

The thought that life forms exist elsewhere in the universe is absurd in the extreme, but worse still, this suggestion strikes at the Word of God. When God created the universe out of nothing and chronicled that great event in His infallible and inerrant Word, He left no gaps for fallen man to fill in. Mortal man is all to ready to make up or invent what he thinks is missing from God's word. There is nothing missing, neither is there any room for imperfect man's imagination to run wild.

There is no mention in the Word of God of life elsewhere in the universe, if life did exist on other planets or galaxies, then Almighty God would have revealed it in His Word. Why go chasing after that which does not exist? Why suggest the existence of something when there is no evidence to support the investigation? The 'plausibility of alien life forms' is only another cynical attempt to prop up the rotten erroneous edifice of evolution. Skeptics, humanists and atheists are making a desperate attempt to discredit the Holy Bible, especially the truth of God's creation, in an attempt to deny the existence of God.

The treacherous inference that alien life form exists, is to remove every trace of the great doctrine of redemption from the Word of God. The Bible says in (1Tim1:15) 'This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners;' Christ came into this world, not any other, to 'seek and to save that which was lost'.

The Vatican must be hard up at the moment for members, not only is it seeking to russell the C O E clerics, but now is chasing after aliens.

The Fall of the House of Saul

I have read an article recently in the Belfast Telegraph regarding ‘The fall of the House of Paisley’ which I found interesting in a strange sort of way. What I mean is that, the title certainly caught my attention. Presently I feel duty bound to furnish some background detail which will add some focus to, ‘The fall of the House of Paisley’.



In 1993, as a licensed minister in the Free Presbyterian church, I resigned from the Presbytery and from the local congregation, the reason being, that I felt the church had fallen away from the scriptural standards it once had aspired to, and had compromised God’s Word; in a word my resignation was because of apostasy in the camp. I have not given detail or background to my resignation at this point in time because space would not permit.



You may well ask, what has this to do with the ‘fall of the House of Paisley’? When the Reformed Free Presbyterian church was founded in 1993, it was the object of critism, abuse and vilification from some prominent Free Presbyterians. However, there was a series of messages preached, at that time, in the Reformed Free Presbyterian church, on ‘The fall of the House of Saul’, which depicted the ‘big man’, Saul, falling away from the commandment of Almighty God and loosing political high office, along with a prominent position in the church. So, therefore, long before the outward cracks appeared, the inward corruption and rebellion were already at work in the Free Presbyterian church, or as the messages put it, ‘the House of Saul’. The ‘House of Paisley’, just like the ‘House of Saul’ started well, and for a time stood strong, yet in the end, sadly both of these fell and great has been their fall. Personally I am saddened by what has happened, because so many people have been let down, spiritually and politically.



The Belefast Telegraph's article refered to what has happened after the Free Presbyterian church compromised its position, relative to the doctrine of separation. Years before ‘the House of Paisley’ began to tremble; the warning had already been sounded by the Reformed Free Presbyterian church, concerning the fall of ‘the House of Saul’. As Mr Paisley’s party and church were inextricably linked, that which shook one was felt in the other. To suggest that, the ‘fall of the House of Paisley’ was the result of political intrigue or subterfuge alone, would only reveal half of the picture. The foundations of ‘the House of Saul’ had been destroyed, and the collapse was inevitable; so too ‘the House of Paisley’. The Word of God states, ‘If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?’ (Psalm11:3)




What is the conclusion to all of this? Well, in my opinion, the DUP have lost the support and guidance of the Free Presbyterian church. No more calls for days of prayer and fasting to seek divine help in times of political crises. They are left now without a spiritual leader, as was once said, ‘a mighty man of God, brought to the kingdom for such a time as this’. The party is left to stand or fall, as the electorate begin to regain consciousness.





Regarding the Free Presbyterian church, things are very different now that Mr Paisley has stood down as moderator. The church now is facing a great dilemma, the founding father and political leader has stood down, political sermons such as ‘the south wind blew softly’ are hardly relevant now; the doctrine of separation has been shredded by the former moderator. The scriptural statement, ‘Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing;’ (2Cor6:17), will be very difficult to proclaim without causing great offence. No longer can it shout ‘pope head’ or ‘apostate’ at its antagonists without shaming its former moderator; the stand it once made against, secularism, humanism, liberalism, Roman Catholicism and apostasy, has been seriously compromised. Perhaps you disagree with me here, but let me put it like this; when a church or denomination would call for days of prayer and fasting to seek divine intervention on any matter, and then to do the very opposite themselves, this type of action ought to be repented of. Furthermore, when a church or denomination would vehemently condemn others for walking disorderly, as professing Christians, and then to be found totally out of step themselves, then this needs to be put right.



‘The fall of the House of Saul’ is chronicled in the Word of God, and is there as a warning to all who are ‘saved by grace’, that they might not be persuaded by the people to compromise their position before Almighty God.



I wonder what lessons will be gleaned from ‘the fall of the House of Paisley’, as perhaps one day it will be chronicled in the pages of secular history?