After preaching at my home congregation Sunday morning, I got into my car in the church parking lot to check my voicemails and messages. One of my colleagues had sent me the link to his new article, which I decided to share with my Twitter followers. To my surprise, I discovered I was locked out of my account for 12 hours for violating Twitter Rules.

But what I had done? What was the violation? There was no further information, no link to file an appeal, and no reference to an offending tweet.

Several years ago, something similar happened to me, but Twitter subsequently apologized, explaining that they had misunderstood my tweet.

This time, I was left in the dark, forcing me to search online for a way to appeal the suspension.

Obviously, this was not a serious crisis, and like many other conservatives, I knew my time on Twitter might be limited. Still, I was wondering what offense I had committed.

Minutes later, I had my answer.

I was informed that I had been locked out my account for 12 hours because of this tweet, which had been posted on January 20: “Will I get punished by Twitter for saying that, in God’s sight, ‘Rachel’ Levine (nominated by Biden to be his assistant secretary for HHS) is a man?”

Yes, that was the offending tweet. It looks like Twitter answered my question!

When biological truth conflicts with transgender activism, biological truth is banned.

When biblical truth conflicts with transgender activism, biblical truth is banned.

There was nothing hateful in the tweet.

There was nothing that would incite violence.

I didn’t even “deadname” Levine, referring to him as “Richard.”

I simply stated the truth. In the sight of God, President Biden’s nominee for assistant secretary for Health and Human Services is a man.

Someone might challenge the statement, asking what gives me the right to speak for God.

Someone else might claim to have a different perspective on God’s point of view.

And, of course, an atheist would dispute the whole notion of God.

Fair enough. We can have those debates.

But to block me for this tweet? Really?

I read the Twitter Rules carefully.

Under the category of Safety are listed these sub-categories: Violence; Terrorism/violent extremism; Child sexual exploitation; Abuse/harassment; Hateful conduct; Suicide or self-harm; Sensitive media, including graphic violence and adult content; and Illegal or certain regulated goods or services.

Then I read the categories of Privacy and then Authenticity.

What rule had I violated? Where had I sinned? What was my transgression? (For John Zmirak’s brilliant, satirical self-confession, see here.)

Then I re-read the verbiage under “Hateful conduct,” which stated, “You may not promote violence against, threaten, or harass other people on the basis of race, ethnicity, national origin, caste, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, religious affiliation, age, disability, or serious disease.”

So was that it? Was that my crime?

I dug down deeper into the rules, clicking the link for more information, which included this note (which, for some reason, used British English spelling):

“We recognise that if people experience abuse on Twitter, it can jeopardize their ability to express themselves. Research has shown that some groups of people are disproportionately targeted with abuse online. This includes; women, people of color, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual individuals, marginalized and historically underrepresented communities.”

So that must be it. By simply stating biological and biblical truth, I had “harassed” a transgender person. What else could it possibly be?

This led then to the next question. Why did it take Twitter four days to decide I was guilty?

My only guess is that on Saturday, former governor Mike Huckabee retweeted my article about Biden’s radical, trans-activist executive order, including my twitter handle in his tweet. And given the size of his Twitter following, the tweet got lots of attention. Did this, in turn, draw attention to my account, and then my tweet?

Either way, the end result was yet another example of Twitter’s leftist censorship.

Ironically, the Twitter Rules page states that,

“Twitter’s purpose is to serve the public conversation. Violence, harassment and other similar types of behavior discourage people from expressing themselves, and ultimately diminish the value of global public conversation. Our rules are to ensure all people can participate in the public conversation freely and safely.”

In reality, Twitter is stifling public conversation and harassing people who believe things as basic as this: in God’s sight, a biological male remains a male, even when identifying as a female.

Not only so, but once again, we see how affirmation of radical transgender ideology trumps science, Scripture, and even common sense.

Perhaps I’ll get blocked the next time for saying that someone who identifies as a cat (or dog or dragon or the like) is actually a human? After all, wouldn’t therians (who believe in some way that they have an animal identity) fit in the class of “marginalized and historically underrepresented communities”?

And what about Twitter’s extraordinary double standards, as Bible-believing conservatives like me get bashed and mocked and cursed by the minute on these platforms, specifically for being who we are and believing what we believe, and that is somehow fine and dandy.

Over 15 years ago, when I began to warn that those who came out of the closet wanted to put us in the closet, I was roundly mocked. “That’s ridiculous,” I was told.

Who would have believed me if I said back then, “Social media platforms will block us for saying that a male who identifies as a female is actually a man in God’s sight”? Who would have believed that?

Levine may be a decent human being and a serious professional. But he is not a woman in God’s sight whether Twitter likes it or not.

In the end, Twitter may suspend me or block me (and countless others). But they cannot change the truth.

---

This article was originally published at AskDrBrown.org.

As city after city in America is under assault, with buildings on fire and bloodied bodies laying in the streets, we need to unite in our condemnation of these violent riots.

There is nothing righteous about looting. Or bashing someone over the head with a skateboard and pelting him with stones. Or vandalizing the store of a black business owner.

This is chaos. This is anarchy. This is lawlessness. This is wrong.

We can be outraged over the killing of George Floyd and aggrieved over the sin of racism without resorting to this.

Here are four reasons why these race riots do far more harm than good.

First, they came at a time when more and more Americans were willing to talk about apparent racial injustice. As tweeted by the influential black rapper and podcaster, Zuby, “The USA temporarily had a moment where virtually ALL Americans were united in empathy and sympathy, over the pointless, awful killing of a fellow citizen.

“People of ALL colours and ALL political stripes, unanimous on an issue of clear injustice.”

“That’s extremely rare…”

He continued, “Now this unity and sympathy has been divided, diluted and misdirected as people fight on the streets, steal from their neighbours, and torch their own communities.”

“It’s fricking sad to see.”

“I’ll say it again. Some people thrive on division and anger. They don’t want solutions.” (A hat tip to my colleague John Zmirak for these references. He responded to Zuby’s tweets with his own: “The looters in Minneapolis no more represent black Americans than the neo-Nazi thugs in Charlottesville represented me.”)

As I emphasized in my latest article, “Hope for Black Americans,” this was a rare time when law and order conservatives like Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and Dan Bongino united with Christian conservatives like Franklin Graham in condemning the killing of a black American by a police officer. Yet the focus has now shifted to the violence and lawlessness of the riots. How on earth is this positive or helpful?

Second, the riots paint a negative picture of black Americans, as if this is what “they” do. As expressed in a May 31 email, conservative Christian activist Scott Lively “contends that the purpose of Black Lives Matter rioting is to INCREASE Racism to justify the Marxist race-war narrative, and laments that too many conservatives and constitutionalists fall into the trap of lumping the innocent majority of Black Americans with the trained thugs of the BLM and the useful idiots who run with them.”

Obviously, Lively’s words are confrontational and even inflammatory, and one can debate his larger thesis. But his overall point is clear: the race riots, allegedly carried out in the memory of George Floyd, play into the worst racial stereotypes of black Americans. I ask again: how on earth is this helpful?

Third, these riots are destructive in their very nature, appealing to our worst instincts. As I tweeted on May 31,

“Peaceful protests can be righteous, godly, and powerful, even reflecting the Spirit of Christ. Rioting and looting are unrighteous, ungodly, and destructive, reflecting the spirit of lawlessness and chaos and murder. Which spirit is that?”

One of my black friends, a historian with a strong social conscience, said to me, “Anything that comes to kill steal and destroy is the enemy” (meaning, from Satan; see John 10:10). Precisely so.

In response to my tweet, someone challenged me, saying, “Forgive me if I’m wrong but didn’t Jesus clear out the temple with a whip?”

I replied,

“1) He acted in perfect harmony with the Lord. We often do not. 2) He did not kill anyone. He did not set the Temple on fire. He did not destroy the businesses of honest, hardworking people. I could go on and on. Surely you must know this.”

Enough said.

Fourth, there appears to be strong evidence that these riots are being aided and abetted by bad players.

Pastor Jim Garlow reported via email on May 31, “A couple of hours ago, some bussed-in protesters were attacking the La Mesa, CA police station only a few miles from where I live.

“A close friend of mine who is black has reported that the Minneapolis Airport was full of people today being flown in to create havoc. Many were being bussed in. And now we are hearing reports of pallets of bricks being dropped off at street corners in cities to give weapons to the anarchists. The George Soros types have found their moment. We pray for our President, governors and mayors.”

This was confirmed by Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, himself a liberal Democrat and an African American Muslim:

“We have evidence that outsiders have been present and, in some cases, have played a very negative role. But I’ve been talking with protesters and trying to get a sense of who some of these folks are and I’ve heard mixed things. Some of the negative stuff has come from people in Minnesota and some of it has come from people on the outside. What I’d say is we’ve got enough to handle on our own and that what we really need to do is refocus on justice for Mr. Floyd. And the negative behavior, looting, arson, does not help us achieve that goal.”

Conservative broadcaster (and former NYPD officer) Dan Bongino was even more blunt: “This isn’t a protest anymore, this is a coup,” he said.

He added, “This is an organized internal coup by a small group of agitators acting as a domestic terror group. That’s a fact.”

No wonder that President Trump has now declared Antifa a terrorist organization.

Groups like this rip at the very fabric of our nation, and their goals are vastly different than the goals of the vast majority of Americans.

Let us then work together for equality and justice. One way we can do that is by denouncing these violent riots. Then, we can refocus on the killing of George Floyd and the larger questions of equal treatment under the law.

---

This article was originally published at Townhall.com.

When an influential political leader states that, when it comes to abortion, our “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed”; when a New York Times columnist tells us we need to remove homosexual practice from our “sin list”; when the Solicitor General tells the U.S. Supreme Court that, potentially, religious schools could lose their tax exemption if they refuse to redefine marriage – when statements like this are being made on a regular basis, don’t tell me I’m overreacting when I sound the alarm.

Recently, after I posted yet another “wake up” call online, a woman accused me of “fear mongering” and called me “Chicken Little” on my Twitter feed.

Ironically, she claimed to be a truth-based realist in her bio, yet it seems that her personal, anti-Christian biases had robbed her of her ability to think clearly, since it is anything but fear mongering to tell American believers that we had better come to grips with the most aggressive assault on our faith in our nation’s history.

I’ve often pointed out that, 10 years ago, when I began to say that, whereas gay activists came out of the closet in the late 1960s, they now want to put us in the closet, I was greeted with mockery and derision. “No one wants to put you in the closet!”

A few years ago, I noticed a change in sentiment, with people now saying, “Bigots like you belong in the closet!”

Now, with the U.S. Supreme Court potentially poised to make same-sex “marriage” the law of the land (this is not a foregone conclusion but could well happen), believers are still saying, “What’s the big deal? How does this affect me?”

How can so many of us be so self-centered and blind?

Cultural commentators like John Zmirak have recently posted articles with provocative titles like, “Gay Totalitarianism and the Coming Persecution of Christians,” with subtitles declaring, “Hatred of the Gospel is boiling over into the vilification of Christians. State violence won’t be far behind, history teaches.”

Another Zmirak article proclaims, “If the Supreme Court Imposes Same Sex Marriage, You Could Lose Your Church,” noting that “Obama’s Solicitor General admits that the feds will treat orthodox Christians like racists.”

A few weeks ago, I posed the question, “Could Biblical Preaching Be Outlawed in America?” Not a few of those responding to the article answered, “Yes!”

After all, if our religious liberties could be eroded so dramatically in a matter of years, who can predict what’s coming next – unless we wake up and start doing what is right today.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer once wrote that, “The ultimate test of a moral society is the kind of world that it leaves to its children.”

What kind of world are we leaving to our children?

When our kids or grandchildren ask us one day, “What were you doing when they changed America?”, how we will respond?

Thankfully, there is still time for us to turn the cultural tide, and there are many leaders and individual believers who have refused to capitulate or throw in the towel.

But there are many more who are still slumbering blissfully in the midst of the storm, content with their cozy, non-offensive gospel churches and their meaningless, “Who am I to judge?” mantras.

That’s why I raise my voice as often as possible, seeking to arouse my fellow Americans from their slumber, urging them to see that an anti-Christian tsunami is already flooding the country.

The good news is that, sooner or later, they will recognize I (and others) have been telling the truth without exaggerating or overreacting. The bad news is that by then it could be too late.

---

This article was originally posted at the Townhall.com website.