"Gay Cure" Advert Banned

Christian group sues TfL after 'gay cure' advert banned from London buses

Mayor of London Boris Johnson, who is in charge of Transport for London (TfL), rejected the ad posters as "offensive to gays"

A Christian group has launched a High Court "battle for free speech" after its advert suggesting that gay people can be "cured" was banned from the sides of London buses.

The Mayor of London, who is in charge of Transport for London (TfL), rejected the ad posters as "offensive to gays".

Boris Johnson has also warned that displaying the ad could lead to a retaliation against the wider Christian community.

The rejected posters say: "Not Gay! Ex-Gay, Post-Gay and Proud. Get over it!"

They are in response to a poster campaign by gay rights group Stonewall, which plastered on the sides of the capital's red buses with the message: "Some people are gay. Get over it!"

The banned ad promotes the view of the Core Issues Trust that homosexuals can be "reoriented" through therapy and prayer.

Today Dr Mike Davidson, the head of the trust, asked Mrs Justice Lang to rule at London's High Court that the ban was unlawful and "a deep threat" to democratic freedoms.

Paul Diamond, appearing for Mr Davidson, told the judge: "We believe this is a very important free speech case on whether a totally temperate, restrained advertisement can be put on the sides of London buses."

Before the hearing started, Mr Davidson said: "I hope this hearing will give us the opportunity to put the case for securing some kind of future for people who want to move away from homosexuality and to be recognised as a valid group with needs to be protected and respected."

A TfL spokesman said: "The advertisement breached TfL's advertising policy as in our view it contained a publicly controversial message and was likely to cause widespread offence to members of the public."

The Whole Truth: Da' T.R.U.T.H. with Mia Fields

Suicide Leads to Heaven???

Can a Christian commit suicide and still go to heaven?

This is the follow up article to the nurse who committed suicide. (read more)

As it turns out, she was a devout roman catholic, at least, that's what was said about her.

Now, if she is a roman catholic, then her way into heaven is different from those who actually
follow what the bible says.

This question also came up when Whitney Houston committed suicide. After all, many said she was a believer.

And so there was confusion as to where she ended up, heaven or hell.

What Does the Bible Say About Suicide?



Very little actually. So little that I can't even think of any scripture that talks about it.

When we have a situation where the bible doesn't specifically deals with an issue, we need to think through all the various aspects that the issue relates to, and what the bible says about those.

Then we need to make a decision based on what we understand.

---

I would say that a majority of believers would actually say that a Christian that commits suicide will not go to heaven.

A lot of times this is based on two things that the bible says.

1. Thou Shalt Not Murder (unlawful taking of a life... including your own)
2. There is no repentance in the grave

There reasoning continues stating that basically when you commit suicide, you're taking the life that God gave you and throwing back in His face.

It's basically the ultimate rejection of God in their eyes.

---

Now, I don't agree with that train of thought.

My immediate reaction to someone who claims to be a Christian and yet commits suicide, is to question their faith.

In my eyes, committing suicide (barring mental health issues), seems to indicate that you're not a Christian - its not a case of you losing your salvation, but rather the evidence of you not having salvation to begin with.

But that doesn't answer the question of whether a Christian can commit suicide and still have entrance into heaven.

So let's have a look into this from a biblical perspective.

---

Starting from the initial thought process of suicide being the "ultimate rejection of God", the bible declares that this is false.

The ultimate rejection of God is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Matthew 12:22-32
Then was brought unto him one possessed with a devil, blind, and dumb: and he healed him, insomuch that the blind and dumb both spake and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, Is not this the son of David?

But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, 'This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils'.

And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, 'Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast [them] out? therefore they shall be your judges. 

But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. 

He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. 

Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.'

Jesus tells us in no uncertain terms that there is one sin that is unforgiveable, and that is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. That, and that alone, is the ultimate rejection of God.

So, if suicide is a sin, and it does look like it is (Thou Shalt Not Murder), it can still be forgiven.

But how is this possible? Doesn't the bible say that there is no repentance in the grave?

Well no, the bible doesn't actually say that.

What the bible does do is imply, very strongly I might add, that there is no repentance in the grave.

For one, we have the true story of Lazarus and the rich man. Furthermore, we have Jesus' many sayings about repenting now, because when we do there is judgement.

No indication is given that those who go to hell will actually exit and go to heaven.

And here's the issue, even if there was repentance in the grave, God wouldn't accept it because it's not repentance based on a desire to love Him, but a repentance based on a desire to escape hell.

After all, one can be sorrowful of the punishment for the wrong they did, but not actually be sorrowful for the wrong itself.

But I digress. This isn't about the nature of repentance. We can do that some other time.

---

Now that we know that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit is the only unforgiveable sin, and no repentance is accepted in the grave, we should have a look at what suicide is.

When someone attempts suicide (whether or not they are successful), they are in a very dark frame of mind.

The entire reasoning behind the suicide is that there is ultimately no hope.

There may even by a belief that things might get a little better, but ultimately, it's just a precursor to things getting even worse or even things not getting better to a point they feel they can be bothered to live/endure through.

A Christian, by definition, is someone who is never hopeless. We are the only ones in the world who have an actual hope. It's not even a hope that the current situation will get better, but that we have a God that truly cares and loves us - so much so that He gave His life for us.

This is why I would question the person's faith. How do we know that the person is actually saved? The answer is that we do not know. And the bible is clear that many people will think they have salvation and do not.

Matthew 7:21-23
'Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. 

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? 

And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.' 

We are promised that God won't allow us to be tempted beyond what we can bear. We have a high priest whom we can cast all our cares upon and not feel condemned in our weaknesses and inabilities. But all of that is based solely on having salvation. Anything short of I solely trust the life, death & resurrection of Jesus (i.e. his redemptive work, including convicting us of sin, enabling us to repent, and follow him et al) means that the person is not Christian - and the suicide shows that the person obviously did not solely trust Jesus for their salvation.

---

Saying that though, having salvation means that our sins... all of our sins... have been forgiven. Even though repentance is apart of the process, God forgives us for things we do not repent for as well as things we have repented for. We do not, and I would say can not, possibly repent for every single sin we have committed in our lives.

For one, we can't remember everything we've done. Secondly, a lot of things we do not consider sin, is actually sin. As a matter of fact, once we are not perfect, we are sinning. And although we can be honest before God and make a blanket plea for forgiveness for sin we've committed knowingly and unknowingly, the fact of the matter is... for there to be true repentance there needs to be an admonition of guilt first. I have done wrong. you have to acknowledge that you're sinning before you can repent of it.

Every day we fall short. Every day we sin because we can't attain perfection. This is why we Jesus' blood cleanses to the utmost. Everyday God is forgiving us for sin we don't even know we commit because God knows we aren't perfect.

Salvation isn't gained through repenting of every single sin we've ever committed. If that was the case, we would still be at the exact place that we begged God to forgive us initially. We would still be on our faces up to this day.

Also... let's not forget that it's not about how the person died. Whether suicide, laying their life down to save someone, or passing quietly in their sleep, the issue is who does their soul belong to.

We know that the fruit of the Holy Spirit is not suicide, never-the-less, if indeed a Christian, which by definition is someone who is indwelt by the Holy Spirit, does go temporarily insane and forgets who their master is... committing suicide... according to the bible, they are saved and will be in heaven.

After all, their sin of committing suicide is not worse than the Christian who is fornicating, lying, committing adultery, teaching bad theology, misrepresenting God, etc. And yet those people will also God to heaven.

Eternal life is a gift of God. Those who have salvation shall never perish. So, it is reasonable to state that a Christian, filled with the Holy Spirit, can go against the will of God and through self-deceit (the flesh) or due to an attack from Satan and his angels, decide to/attempt to/succeed in committing suicide, and still have a seat prepared for them at the great wedding feast.

However, I think it would be better for us to first take a careful look at the fruit in the life of a person who was successful in committing suicide to see if we can actually say they were saved or not before we start putting every drug user into the category of salvation because they said they "believed in Jesus" one time in their life.

Painful? Is It Really?

Have you ever wished that you could feel no pain?

I can guarantee that at least a thousand people in the world, if not almost the entire population has had this same thought at least once in their lives.

Immediately we would think of all the times that we or people we know or don't know have been hurt.

Those people who end up in serious accidents would probably feel this way from time to time.

We would so quickly wish for a life without pain, before we even gave the question much thought. However, I have come to the conclusion that being able to feel pain is a blessing from God, Christ Jesus.

------- Why!?! -------

A while back, I came across a few articles in the newspaper which struck my interest.

The articles were about the problems some couples were having raising their children.

It wasn't the behaviour of the child that was the problem. It was that the children being talked about, could not feel any pain.

Indeed, the children didn't cry if they scraped their knee or if someone accidentally stepped on their foot. You would probably think that's good, but at the same time, the children would just as easily break their legs in different places and never know about it because they couldn't feel the pain.

Normal activities like running and jumping caused tremendous worries for the parents involved as they were terrified whether or not their child might actually fracture or break something and never know.

Necessary things like eating became a problem as well.

One of the mothers told how her son once bit through his tongue and didn't feel it. The same son pulled out his teeth without a word. The child scorched his hand but didn't feel anything.

------- It Comes Natural!?! -------

Apparently, this is a disease that doesn't afflict the majority of the world population... or does it?

I started to think about this, as the majority of the population treat their bodies and lives as though they did have the disease.

They do all manner of evil to themselves and each other even though they still feel the pain.

Can you imagine a world without pain now!?!

How utterly horrible it would be.

The human heart has become a very terrible thing and just likes to use every single advantage to do evil things.

I came to the conclusion that feeling pain, in this day and age is a tremendous blessing.

We should praise Jesus for giving us the ability to feel pain.

Without pain we wouldn't be able to know when our body needs healing. Without pain we wouldn't know, for the most part what things aren't healthy for us to do. Without pain we probably wouldn't even be able to grasp what Jesus being crucified and going through that entire ordeal would be like.

Dust is All I Am

The bible declares in Genesis 2:7, "And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."

The reason I am stating this is because over the past months I have been convinced that Christians should not characterize anybody by the color of their skin.

----- Obviously -----

Now I know that some people will right about now say... 'Well, Duh!' But it's not that simple. Not only should we not characterize other people by the color of their skin, but we must also stop characterizing ourselves by this as well. I have used the scripture above to help show where I am coming from with this thought.

God created each of us from the dust of the earth. Because of this (obviously I'm not going to get into the whole body chemistry stuff) we are different colors. However, throughout the bible you do not see people make choices based on the colour of anybody's skin. Even the enemy's of God, didn't do this. So why has it permeated the world (Christians included) that we characterize by the colour of each other's skin?

Not only this, but we even characterize wrongly. For example, look at any typical garden and you can see that the dust (dirt, ground, soil, whatever...) is brown. But yet, we call brown people black. Well... that is, we call people from America, the Caribbean, Europe and 'parts' of Africa black. I find this wrong. It bothered me so much that I started asking many people questions about how they came to this conclusion. All the people I asked were Christians.

My question was something like, you would call someone from south Africa black? They say yes. Why wouldn't you call someone from India or Afhghanistan black even though they have the same colour of skin? After this they would usually try to change the topic as they can not give an answer why they do this.

Based on this conviction, whenever people start saying black and white, I say oh, you mean that brown, or cream person. The person I'm speaking to gets annoyed at the fact that I don't call people black or white. When I say, well they aren't black or white are they? They tend to get in a huff.

----- It's All About Race -----

What race is it all about? When I was growing up people used to talk about the human race all the time. But since then, people started increasingly calling people of different colours different races, as if they were something other than human. This thought about correct categorizing isn't politically correct either, as people don't seem to like being referred to as brown, cream, peach, coloured... but would rather a blanket statement of what they are not. The differences which we should categorize by, if we do categorize, is nationality for one. This is found in the bible, over and over again.

I believe that people who won't want to look at people this way have a problem which they are not willing to allow God to help them overcome. While growing up I used to meet Christians (at least that's what they called themselves) who argued vehemently that Jesus was black because he was born in africa. Little children in schools are taught to tell the difference between the colours of crayons, but when it comes to skin they have to be taught something different, as if the colors change.

----- Biblical Conclusion -----

Firstly, Jesus wasn't black, because there is no human that is black. Jesus was most likely some shade of brown, even if it is a very very light shade (which people today would call mixed-race).

Secondly, we as Christians should submit ourselves to God and ask Him to help us see and categorize people as He does, and not as the world does.

Thirdly, it might not seem like it matters at first, but when you see the effect it has when you are able to no longer categorize people by their color you'll see how much different from the world you now are as a Christian.

I leave you with this thought. The last time I filled out a form that had those checkboxes for ethnicity I had to put other, because I couldn't in all good conscience, tick anything else because I no longer fit in any of the categories that they usually presented.

Christian Sows Seeds and Reaps

Heavenly message in field took dedicated farmer twenty years to create

His first attempt in the 1990s was a disaster - a thorny mess of thistles

A farmer has reaped what he sowed after trees he planted 20 years ago finally revealed a message only those from above can read.

Peter Gunner, 62, planted dozens of willow trees two decades ago and has pruned them to spell out his favourite Bible passage, John 14:6: "Jesus said to him: 'I am the way, the truth, and life'."

But the message can only be seen from the air.

The committed Christian created his own Garden of Eden in his Sussex field so visitors wandering through the thick maze could experience his metaphor for life.

He said: "You walk around in it but you don't really know what your life is going to look like from above."

The creation at his home Burchetts Farm is the second time he has attempted the ambitious project.

His first attempt in the 1990s was a disaster. Instead of forming in a pretty pattern of words he ended up with a thorny mess of thistles which mean he had to start all over again.

For his second attempt the religious farmer mapped the words on a computer before getting to work on the field armed with a tape measure and string.

Despite years of pruning Mr Gunner only saw his labor of love for the first time recently, when a police officer neighbour gave him an aerial picture taken for a helicopter.

Unfortunately, the aerial images highlighted slight mistakes in his creation - the top of the J is slightly wonky and the 'a' in 'am' is askew - but he hopes to fix them one day.

Refuting Shabir Ally on Muhammad in the Bible

The latest episode of Jesus or Muhammad

 

Jesus at the Center: Israel Houghton & New Breed

Easter Heresy

In my last post, I briefly touched on the doctrine of the trinity and the unity of the God-head.

This reminded me of the last Easter sermon I heard.

So, it was Sunday morning and I'm in the congregation listening to the resurrection day presentations, when a heretical proclamation is spoken on the microphone.

Do you know what it was?

Well, in a nutshell, it was - 'when Jesus was on the cross, the Father turned His back on Him. For the first and only time, the Son was separated from the Father. All so that Christ could pay for our sins.'



This isn't the first time I've heard this mind you, but the more I here it, the more annoyed I get.

Let me rephrase that. The more I hear it preached, or declared as truth, the more annoyed I get.

You see, it's one thing to quietly believe it, but it's a different thing to preach it to a congregation (causing the majority of the people to believe it because they don't read their bibles).

Seeing as how I've only been adopted for about 11 years, I thought I'd ask my wife if she has heard any different in her experience, as she has been in the church since she was a child.

Sadly, the answer was no.

As far back as she could remember, which is pretty far back, she has always been taught that the Father and the Son were separated during the payment of sin on the cross.

This belief is so popular and widespread that it was even taught in at least two songs from one of my favourite Christian rappers.

"A purple robe, yo, they slapped on him//
Psalm 22 the Father turned His holy back on Him"
The Ambassador - Selah (Christology in Laymen's Terms)

"Cuz He agreed to bleed and look bad//
became sin for men and wore a cross like a book bag//
'Look Dad', the Father couldn't, He wouldn't//
He's too holy so He shouldn't, bring the hook in"
The Ambassador - Super Stars (House of Representatives)

He is looked up to by many, including myself, as a biblically sound Christian teacher/preacher.

So what exactly is the problem?

The doctrine that Jesus was separated from the Father while He was on the cross and that the Father turned His back on Jesus is heresy. And although the Father turning away from (but not separating) from Jesus isn't necessarily heresy, it isn't biblically correct.

Why is it heresy?

Well, for one, it makes God out to be... not God.

Let me explain.

The bible describes God as a trinity.

If Jesus was separated from the Father, even for a millisecond, the trinity would no longer exist.

In that same vein, Jesus could no longer be God, as He would be a separate entity. This brings the divinity of Christ into question.

The bible would become contradictory because Jesus is shown many times to be one with the Father, not a separate entity.

And lastly salvation couldn't be obtained through Jesus because the bible says that God is the only saviour. And if Jesus was separated... see what I mean?

Where did this false doctrine come from?

Although I don't know (or care), where the original idea comes from, I know it persists because of two reasons.

1. Often times Christians, by default, adopt the doctrines that are preached/told/taught to them in a congregational setting without reading their bible to check if what is being said is true.

This can be due to laziness, indifference, or placing the speaker in a spiritually unhealthy place in their hearts and minds (aka idol).

You will find that many Christians are on AA (automatic amen) setting most of the time.

Because of this, a lot of Christians soak up bad theology, false doctrine, and heresy like Patrick's friend.

And instead of examining everything in the light of scripture, they are blown to and fro by every wind of doctrine because the person in front/with the mic/on the platform says.

2. The second reason is that people read into the bible what isn't there.

Instead of accepting what the plain reading of the verses say... in context, they strain and manipulate to make it say what it doesn't, regardless if it contradicts other parts of the bible.

You will find this in things like: the gap theory, Abel's tithe, tithing, etc.

The exegesis of the text gives the correct results, but eisegesis leads to error.

What verses are used?

There are really 2 points in the bible that is used to push this heresy.

The main one is when Christ is on the cross and He says 'my God, my God, why have you forsaken me' (Mar. 15:34, Matt. 27:46).

What is taught is that Jesus says this because the weight of sin is so heavy that Jesus has been separated from the Father.

Another variation is that Jesus "feels" like He is separated, because the Father has turned His back to Him.

In both renditions the thought process is that since sin separates us from God, and Jesus becomes sin for us, He is separated from the Father - and Jesus crying out on the cross is the proof.

There is a variation of this thought which includes the other point in scripture.

It basically says that God is too Holy to look at evil (Hab. 1:13)

This verse is used in addition to the sin separation thought, to say that since Christ took upon himself all of our sins, that the Father turned away (separated), because He is too Holy to look at sin.

Another version is simply that the Father had to separate Himself or else He wouldn't/couldn't have been able to pour out His wrath on the Son because He loves Him.

Some people even go so far to say that the reason that Jesus started to sweat blood was because He knew that going to the cross meant the He would be separated from the Father for the first time ever.

The Truth

The truth of the matter is that Jesus was never separated from the Father, nor can He be due to the reasons given above and more.

Neither did the Father turn His back on the Son.

How do I know this?

Because Jesus was quoting a psalm, psalm 22 to be exact, as seen in The Ambassador's lyrics above.

The reason Jesus quoted this specific portion of scripture was not because of any separation or abandonment by the Father.

He said it to declare that prophecy was being fulfilled right in front of those peoples eyes.

Those who knew the scriptures would have immediately remembered the rest of that psalm and saw that it was talking about Jesus.

This is not the first time Jesus did this. When Jesus stood up in the temple and said 'The Lord has anointed me...', that was Him declaring that prophesy was being fulfilled.

It should be our cue to turn to those chapters and read them to see and understand how it was being fulfilled.

If you go to psalm 22, you will see that the Father didn't turn His back on the Son at all. No where in that psalm does it show that the Father turned away or separated Himself.

Consider verses like Psalm 22:24 that says 'For He has not despised nor abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; neither has He hid His face from him; but when he cried onto Him, He heard'.

This is the exact opposite of what people says happened.

If the Father did turn away or separate Himself from the Son, this verse wouldn't make sense.

What happens though, is that people read into chapter what's not there.

They already believe the heretical separation doctrine, so when they read this psalm, that's what they see.

Even though it shows otherwise.

What About the Other Verse?

In regards to God being too Holy to look at sin/evil, when you read Habakkuk 1:13 you'll realise that people who quote this are actually cutting the sentence in half.

When you read the entire verse you'll see that God does look at evil/sin.

Hab. 1:13 - Your eyes are too pure to look at evil, and you can't look at wickedness. Why do you look at those who deal treacherously, and don't say anything when the wicked devours someone who is more righteous than they are?

What people do is rip the first sentence out of its context and run with that thought, even though the very next sentence contradicts the first.

The prophet is asking God questions and reasoning within himself.

We know this because he does it throughout the entire chapter.

The truth of the matter, as stated in the rest of the verse, is that God does look upon evil.

The testimony of the rest of the bible confirms this.

- Nothing is hidden from God.
- He sees and knows all things.

When people don't quote an entire verse, but take bits and pieces, we should be very wary.

Because when this is done, we often times walk into error, as proven by the issue at hand.

How do we stop this doctrine?

The problem is that, in my opinion, the majority of the people that believe and teach this heresy, don't realise what they are saying/doing.

They are material heretics as opposed to formal heretics (shout out to Mr. Todd Friel).

I am convinced that if someone took these people through the bible, and showed them how this doctrine is false (in love of course), that they will indeed turn to correct theology.

I'm sure these people would be shocked by the logical end result of this doctrine.

So, if you know someone that believes this, take them to one side and teach them what the scripture actually says.

Don't try and force it down people's throats though.

However, if after you've gone through the scriptures and showed them the extreme dangers of this doctrine, that they still refuse to take heed - then they have accepted heresy and their salvation would now be in question, because they have effectively exchanged the truth of the word of God for a lie.

Their God is not the God described in the bible. So too is their Jesus not the one described in the bible.

It's one thing to be ignorant of the truth for whatever reason, but when the truth is presented and explained, one is no longer in a state of ignorance, and depending on the answer, one will be numbered amongst the followers of truth or those who knowingly reject it.

We should always allow the bible to challenge our beliefs and when we differ, we should change our beliefs.

The bible is the measuring rod that we must use to make sure we're in the faith.

We should be about the business of renewing our minds with the reading, understanding, and application of the word of God - not renewing the word of God with our minds.

I'm pretty confident that the Ambassador was not intentionally trying to teach heresy and probably didn't realise what he was saying. Now that a number of years have passed since he wrote those lyrics, I do hope He has seen the problem and have made the necessary corrections in both his theology in lyrics.

And for those reading this, if you believe this doctrine, I ask that you take a hard look at the scriptures involved.

Ask God to open your eyes, give you understanding and to reveal himself to you.

Maranatha

Transitional Fossil Found

Scientists identify crocodile ancestor among fossils discovered a century ago

Tyrannoneustes lythrodectikos, whose remains lay unidentified in a museum, was a super-predator with dolphin-like features.

A creature resembling a hybrid dolphin and crocodile has been identified by scientists examining fossil remains discovered more than a century ago.

The new species, named Tyrannoneustes lythrodectikos, was a marine "super-predator" that lived 163m years ago. It belonged to a group of ancient crocodiles with dolphin-like features.



An amateur fossil hunter found the reptile's partial skeleton in a clay pit near Peterborough in the early 1900s. Experts have only now been able to confirm the identity of the remains, housed at the Hunterian Museum at the University of Glasgow.

The animal had pointed, serrated teeth and a large gaping jaw suited to feeding on large-bodied prey. It represents a transitional form between marine crocodiles that fed on small prey and their supersized relatives.

Dr Mark Young, from the University of Edinburgh, said: "It is satisfying to be able to classify a specimen that has been unexamined for more than 100 years, and doubly so to find that this discovery improves our understanding of the evolution of marine reptiles."

Dr Neil Clark, palaeontology curator at the Hunterian, said: "Little research has been done on this specimen since it was first listed in 1919. It is comforting to know that new species can still be found in museums as new research is carried out on old collections.

"It is not just the new species that are important, but an increase in our understanding of how life evolved and the variety of life forms that existed 163m years ago in the warm Jurassic seas around what is now Britain."

The research appears in the Journal of Systematic Palaeontology.