SMYRNA - April 1994



APRIL 1994


o Double Agents in Christendom?
o First Example - Pat Robertson
o Another Example - Billy Graham
o Another Example - James Dobson
o The Jewish Flap at Queens College
o No End to the Double Standard
o If Only Our Friends Would Quit Helping Our Enemies!
o Rush Limbaugh
o Bill's & Hillary's Guru
o What About Goodwill?


Christianity betrayed by ignorant or careless leaders is just as dead as if it were delibrately destroyed.

SMYRNA has often referred to agents provocateurs within Christian organizations. Agents provocateurs are those who join a group, pretend like-mindedness but undermine it from within. It is nearly impossible to ferret out a double agent because their true motives are secrets in their minds. But we can determine to expose those open acts which inherently undermine, whether or not the one committing the acts is in fact a double agent. In other words, regardless of intent, if one damages, the damage is real even if it was unintentional. We simply must not remain silent while Christ's kingdom is trashed by so-called well intentioned people.

With that in mind, let us present several examples of subtle Christ-bashing by prominent Christians who apparently are oblivious to the significance of their acts.

Return to Table of Contents


In our Jan. issue we published the fact that Pat Robertson was supporting the Jewish grass roots movement to free Jonathan Pollard, the convicted Jewish spy. After trying for 4 months to get an answer from Robertson, his office sent a press release dated June 29, 1992, in which he stated:

"Having studied the facts carefully concerning the Jonathan Pollard case, it is my feeling that Jonathan Pollard is a victim of gross injustice and cruel and unusual punishment. His offense consisted of telling our closest ally in the Middle East about military buildups in Iraq and Syria that threatened the very existence of Israel. We acknowledge what Mr. Pollard did was a violation of the law, but I strongly feel he has more than paid the price for his crime, and that President Bush should commute his sentence to time already served in prison."

What's wrong with Robertson's position? First, if he studied the case carefully, why did he say that Pollard's crime was in telling the Israelis about military buildups in Iraq and Syria? Our understanding is that the prosecution proved that Pollard passed far more sensitive secrets to them than that. Secondly, by what reasoning was Pollard a victim of "gross injustice and cruel and unusual punishment"? Since he was a spy, how did he become a victim - especially of gross injustice? Is Pollard suffering cruel and unusual punishment? When did normal imprisonment become cruel and unusual?(1) Robertson sounds like a bleeding heart liberal or a Jewish ideologue!

(1) On 3/28/94 I received a call from Gene Kapp, spokesperson for Pat Robertson. He said that instead of "cruel & unusual punishment" Pat probably was talking about Pollard's stiff sentence. He didn't know about the Vanunu case but he would pass it on to Robertson.

In our Jan. issue we contrasted the Pollard case with the Mordechai Vanunu case. Vanunu is in an Israeli prison for telling the world that "Israel" has nuclear weapons. And he truly is suffering cruel and unusual punishment according to his family.

It seems clear to SMYRNA that the reason why Pollard is supported and Vanunu is abandoned is the loyalty shown by Israel firsters to that political state. Pat Robertson is obviously an Israel firster, and a case could be made from his own words that "Israel" takes precedence over the U.S. This is vastly more important than most people realize. Allegiance to a foreign power has always been looked upon by all countries as treasonous.

Why would Pat Robertson and others feel such enormous kinship to the Israeli state? Why would he support a convicted spy and accuse the U.S. of railroading that spy to a cruel and unusual punishment? The answer lies in the heresy of dispensationalism and its anti-New Testament content. Deeper, however, is the source from which dispensationalism sprang. It is merely the highly sophisticated casuistry of Talmudism. When we comprehend this fact, it becomes crystal clear why dispensationalists such as Robertson give all out support (allegiance?(2) to "Israel" and the "chosen people" perfidy.

(2) Remember Arnold Fruchtenbaum in our March 1993 issue? He is a "Jewish Christian" who openly said in a public meeting that he would fight for Israel against the U.S. if he had to make that choice.

This writer harbors no personal animosity toward Mr. Robertson. We think he is doing an excellent job in three departments: the ACLJ is defending First Amendment rights for Christians; CBN News covers perspectives not given by the mass media; and his Christian Coalition movement is fine. If we assess those efforts in narrow terms, we can approve. However, we have a responsibility to report and assess the destructive elements of his programs, and we believe his staunch support of Jewish and Israeli causes is destructive. We cannot understand why any Christian would support the fountainhead of Christ-hating efforts.

Return to Table of Contents


Pastor Herman Otten, Editor of "Christian News", has stated that Billy Graham believes that Jews can be saved without Christ.(3) In a special to Religious News Service (RNS) 7/21/87, Virginia Culver stated that Graham believes that "...God's covenant with the Jewish people is eternal and that Jews are God's chosen people." He assured 30 Jewish leaders prior to his Denver crusade that he does not target Jews for conversion to Christianity for this reason.(4)

(3) The "Christian News Encyclopedia", Vol. Iv, p. 2499.

(4) Ibid.

Jesus didn't die for Jews? What kind of nonsense is this?

This shouldn't be surprising to informed Christians; SMYRNA has published Graham's beliefs in the past. Either Billy doesn't understand the atonement which is absolutely central to Christian beliefs, or he is placating Jewish wrath. The atonement is dependent on the virgin birth, the crucifixion, the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ. Without these there is no Christianity. When one examines the belief that Jews can bypass Jesus Christ because God allows them exclusive access to His presence, it boggles the mind that one such as Billy Graham could believe such colossal error. Can one be a Christian and believe such heresy? Since we are not God and cannot judge Billy in terms of individual repentance, we can only say that Christians who entertain this notion are the most ignorant, careless Christians possible. If Jesus did not die for the sins of the Jews, He did not die for anyones sins and we are all hopeless, helpless and undone. If there is another door by which sinners can enter the sheepfold, then Jesus made a mistake.(5) And if Jesus made a mistake in this matter He cannot be Who the Bible claims He is, and therefore not our Savior, in which case we have no hope. But thanks be to God He made no mistake. Only those who wish to place Jews in a special category of creation claim such an abominable untruth.

(5) John 10:1-18

How do we expose extremely serious error into which Billy Graham and other leaders have fallen without being castigated by some of our brethren? We dislike being unpopular but we dislike even more the displeasure of Almighty God Who holds us accountable for what we teach. Billy Graham surely knows the New Testament, so why would he make such fundamentally incorrect statements? Does someone have him in their grip? His doctrine on Jewish matters comes straight out of the Jewish Talmud, the most ancient, anti-Christian collection of bigotry, racism, and immorality in existence.

He that has ears to hear, let him hear what the Bible and history reveal.

Return to Table of Contents


The photo below was taken from the April 1994 issue of "Focus on the Family", the James Dobson magazine. This picture should cause Christians everywhere to comprehend the subtle danger inherent in dispensationalism, and to actively remind people like Dobson that the New Testament book of Hebrews was written for the very purpose of exposing and preventing this kind of heresy-bordering-on-apostasy.(6)

(6) Heresy compared to apostasy: Heresy is doctnnal error, whereas apostasy is a departure from the faith. The belief inherent in the Seder photo is potential apostasy.

We have titled the photo "The Emptiness of a Chair" because it shows an empty chair at the table of those who are celebrating Seder (pronounced say'-der). This empty chair and food are provided as symbolical reminders of the future appearance of Elijah who will signify the coming of the Messiah. But since Messiah has already come the empty chair can only mean that the hearts of those who still look for Elijah to announce the Messiah are empty of meaning and hope.

THE SEDER: It is becoming increasingly popular among Biblically uninformed Christians.

God, through the prophet Malachi (4:5) had promised to send to Israel the prophet Elijah prior to the appearance of Messiah. That's why the Jews set the Seder table with an empty chair; they're waiting for Elijah to come and announce the Messiah. But Jesus said that John the Baptist was in fact the fulfillment of that prophecy. John announced that Jesus was the Messiah (see Matt. 11:14).

Jews who are told that Jesus was "their" Messiah and who subsequently become believers, apparently think that they can transfer their culture over into a new system and continue to practice rituals and customs without breaking stride. They have been misled by ignorant or careless Christian evangelizers. They are called "Jewish Christians" or "Christian Jews" but there are no such entities. They either become Christians and relinquish their old ways or they remain Jews. This writer didn't invent this doctrine, it comes out of the New Testament.(7) Suppose Buddhists or Hindus wanted to become Christians and carry over their religious observances. Would dispensationalists allow that? Of course not! "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."(8)

(7) See Matt. 9:17; Luke 23:28-30; Heb. 13:9-10.

(8) II Cor. 5:17

The tabernacle in the desert is gone. The temple in Jerusalem is gone. It is impossible for the Mosaic system to be observed. Passover is obsolete. The Jewish author Ausubel stated:

"As a substitute for the Passover sacrifices and rites in the Temple, the latter-day sages of the Talmud who flourished during the first centuries after the Destruction established the institution of the Seder."(9)

(9) Ausubel, Nathan, "Pictoral History of the Jewish People", Crown Publishers, NY, 1953, p.27.

Why, then, does a Christian as prominent as James Dobson promote useless, undesirable and even forbidden obsoleteness? He is in fact promoting another religion. We beg of him to digest the book of Hebrews!

Return to Table of Contents


"Exposing a lie or publicizing one?" was the title of an article by Walter Ruby in the "Jewish World" of 2/25/94. The Jewish community in NY (in fact, all across the country) is ablaze with indignation against those college student newspapers that have run ads placed by Bradley Smith, well known "holocaust",(10) revisionist of California, head of the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (CODOH). But nowhere is the pressure greater than at the "Queens College Quad", student paper at Queens College where the student body is 30% Jewish.(11) Queens College is part of the City University of New York (CUNY).

(10) SMYRNA places quotation marks around the word "holocaust" because it actually is a misnomer.

(11) Statistic obtained from David (last name unknown), member of the editorial board, in a 'phone conversation the latter part of March.

Those who want open debate on the holocaust are bigots, racists
and neo-Nazis. Compare that with: Those who question evolution
cannot be scientists. Oh, really? *****************************************************************

Smith has been placing ads in college newspapers around the country (many have refused to run his ad) to inform students that a view other than the Jewish view of the "holocaust" exists. He is not claiming that the "holocaust" didn't happen, but that there is no proof that gassings occurred. This has stirred up a hornet's nest. At Queens College the problem was considered so grave that the president, Shirley Strum Kinney, and a prof. of sociology and Jewish studies (Samuel Heilman) denounced the "Quad". Others who joined the denunciation were Michael Berenbaum, director of research for the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum(12) and Dr. Jeffrey Ross, director of campus affairs at the ADL of B'nai B'rith. You saw them on CBS's "60 Minutes". Smyrna's readers are familiar with the secretive, powerful spy organization ADL.

(12) Some have pointed out that the costly complex on public land in Washington is not a U.S. memorial because it memorializes nothing in which this country was involved, nor does it commemorate lost American lives.

The Jewish student editor of the "Quad", Andrew Wallenstein, in response to those who criticized him, insisted that Jewish leaders who think that the silent treatment is the best way to defeat such "bigots" as Smith are tactically wrong. According to the "Jewish World" article, he believes the best way " to discredit his [Bradley Smith's] pose as a scholar by exposing his longstanding involvement in neo-Nazi organizations." In other words, one cannot be a scholar and a neo-Nazi simultaneously. This reminds SMYRNA of the arrogance of evolutionists who claim that creationists cannot be scientists. Such a posture reveals more about the subjective interests of those who re-define the language than it does about their knowledge of the subject.

(The following was faxed to the "Quad", with copies to many other media:)

March 24, 1994

Editorial Board Queens College Quad Flushing, NY 11367

Dear Editorial Board members:

I'm sure you are tired of the flap over Bradley Smith's efforts to reach students with a revisionist view of the holocaust, but by its very nature the subject will not go away quickly.

There are obviously several facets to this issue, but brushing aside the more obvious ones such as First Amendment rights, let's look at others. To most Jews the holocaust is a closed subject. As you now know, Jewish leaders, some of whom are your mentors, have descended forcefully upon you because you gave space to Smith. It has been a traumatic experience for you. Nevertheless, you must continue to do that which is morally and lawfully correct.

Non-Jews find it difficult to appreciate certain subjects that exercise the emotions of Jews, and that's an important point to consider. Many non-Jews think that Jewish leaders are often their own worst enemies because they create anti-Semitism where it didn't exist. Even some Jews have noted this. For example, "The Jewish Guardian" of November 1, 1975 stated on page 5: "Zionism has a built-in interest in total Jewish emigration from the Diaspora to the Zionist state of Israel and therefore in undermining the position of Jews in the countries of which they are residents and citizens. Zionism and antisemitism are in fact working for the same goal."

Jewish leaders don't seem to understand that much of what they say and do is as offensive to non-Jews as anti-Semitism is to them. As Uriel Zimmer in his book, "Torah - Judaism and the State of israel" remarked, "The Jewish people, Rabbi Judah Halevy (the famous medieval poet and philosopher) explains in his 'Kuzari', constitutes a separate entity, a species unique in Creation, differing from nations in the same manner as man differs from the beast or the beast from the plant.. although Jews are physically similar to all other men, yet they are endowned [sic] with a second soul' that renders them a separate species." It does little good to point out that not all Jews believe this, for when the chips are down there is solidarity on most issues dearest to their hearts.

Although the foregoing references do not even scratch the surface of historical confrontations between Jews and non-Jews, they furnish enough for non-Jews to want an open debate on the entire spectrum of issues surrounding Jewish claims to "chosen people" status, even on the holocaust, for if historical evidences are as irrefutable as Jewish leaders claim, Jews have nothing to lose and everything to gain by proving their case, not with emotional reaction but with empirical evidence of a contextual nature. Only this will suffice to allay the doubts of honest seekers, because increasing numbers of non-Jews are already offended by the fifteen minute film in the Holocaust Museum in Washington which they see as "Christian-bashing"

Please do not categorize me with Bradley Smith or anyone else who may or may not be neo-Nazis. Lumping all of those who question Jewish claims or motives into the common pot containing anti-Semites or Ku Klux Klanners will only exacerbate the problem.

One final observation: it appears to many non-Jews that the "chosen people" have never done anything wrong in history. It's always "the other guys who have been culpable. Jewish leaders might do well to occasionally admit to mistakes and manifest some sort of contrition. To claim that they have been persecuted by all others throughout history without having done anything to antagonize their enemies seems a little far fetched to rational people.

Wishing that there could be more peaceful and honest dialogue between us, I remain,


(addresss etc...)

(Note: If my letter cannot be printed as is, please do not print any part of it. Thank you.)

Return to Table of Contents


On 3/10/94 ABC's 6 o'clock news showed pictures of civilian Jewish settlers carrying fully automatic weapons on the streets after the recent massacre of Palestinians by an American Jewish physician. What a travesty of justice. The Palestinians are unarmed and under curfew in their homes and the Jews roam the streets with machine guns and any other fully automatic weapons they can get. Arid the Israeli military is not allowed to shoot dissident Jews. Obviously, lsrael(13) doesn't have gun control laws that apply to the "chosen peo- ple".

(13) We place quotation marks around "Israel" when refering to the present political state, because it is a misnomer.

This scene should wake up Americans about gun control in the U.S. Once again, the double standard is sickeningly obvious. The vast majority of Jews in America are liberal to leftist. And the orthodox, which are normally considered conservative by uninformed Christians, are more militant in maintaining the double standard than the liberals. In the U.S. the bleeding heart liberals (including perhaps a majority of Jews) are gaining ground in outlawing any kind of guns for civilians. But in "Israel" Jews seen in news clips tote them openly in the settle- ment, and are using them against Palestinians.

The double standard is reserved for those who make up the rules as they go.

In America, decent citizens are losing their constitutional right to bear arms to protect themselves against vicious criminals and tyrannical government, while Jews in "Israel" have no such restrictions placed on them. Can you visualize Americans walking around on the streets with Uzis, Thompson sub-machine guns and other weaponry? The authorities would go bonkers! The establishment media would blow their lids. Think about it. Randy Weaver's wife and son were murdered by the feds and 87 Branch Davidians were burned to death by the same feds, just for being SUSPECTED of having illegal weapons! Weaver's problems began when he was charged with selling two shotguns with barrels no more than a quarter of an inch too short. But Israeli Jews, who couldn't exist without American taxpayer's dollars, can flaunt their fully automatic arms openly and shoot unarmed victims whom they hate.

Where are the protests of the Bradys and liberal-leftists of Congress and special interest groups who have rammed gun control down our throats? I'll tell you where they are! They're hiding behind impenetrable skins of self righteousness and intolerable intellectual dishonesty. In reality, they aid and abet the criminal element.


On 3/25/94 "...a Boston police SWAT team, armed to the hilt, broke down the door of an apartment. They were looking for a drug and weapons cache that an informer had told them was in the apartment.

"But their informer was wrong, and the apartment that police raided was occupied by a 75-year-old retired minister..."(14) who had a heart attack and died less than an hour later.

(14) San Francisco Chronicle, 3128/94.

What with Waco and all, don't you think that police policies should come under severe scrutiny? There's something radically wrong with policies that allow officers to break down doors and terrorize citizens merely because some anonymous tipster either imagined a crime or deliberately wanted to get even with someone. How safe are we in our homes as long as the police can act on such a tip? No one is safe! When the time comes to round up all political prisoners as the Communists did in the U.S.S.R. and China (after our guns have been confiscated), the aforementioned tactic will be as easy as shooting ducks sitting on a pond. Think about it.


This writer marvels at Americans who haven't the desire to know the truth nor the guts to defend their own freedom or the freedom and safety of their loved ones. Our forefathers would disown us with scathing contempt. Those who have refused to get involved deserve every bit of what they're going to get. Unfortunately, those who have done the right thing will suffer along with them.

For a recent example of the kind of "thinking" that prevails among many Americans, consider the following:

On March 17, 1994 CNN News covered the latest development in the Tonya Harding case. Tonya now admits that she withheld information about the assault on Nancy Kerrigan, but authorities aren't going to indict her. Although her career is uncertain, many support her because "she has talent". In other words, talent should triumph over punishment for criminal behavior (little wonder that Hollywood gets away with so much). The man who attacked Nancy Kerrigan is now a hero because he refrained from permanently disabling her. Finally, William Kunstler, the 1960's Communist lawyer who has defended more bad guys than anyone else, says that Nancy Kerrigan should pay Tonya Harding's fines because she profited financially from the assault.

Well, when we finish redefining the English language into some kind of fluid nothingness, and crimes are redefined right out of the law, all of our taxes can be used to reward those who harm others as national heroes.

Return to Table of Contents


In this war in which we are fighting for the souls of human beings and for the survival of our culture and country as we have known it, there are many conservatives, Christians and patriots who really don't understand the enemy. And if one does not understand one's enemy, one will lose the war. [YES! ABSOLUTE FACT! -BeWISE]

Conservatives(15) who seek truth depend on news and commentary from sources they can trust, since the mass media are untrustworthy. But if a conservative publisher or broadcaster does not print the whole truth, how can we trust them? We know that there are those who want to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth but they cannot do so because of their sensitive positions. We understand this. However, if the whole truth cannot be told by some, the least they can do is not mislead the faithful by deliberately aiding and abetting the enemy. Some are doing that. [MOST are doing that!! -BeWISE]

(15) We dislike the labels "conservative" and "liberal", but for want of better terms we use them.

For example, in the March 1994 issue of a well known conservative, Christian oriented newsletter the author states: "It should be remembered that born again, evangelical Christians are hated by the secular humanists, the socialists, the New Agers, the New World Order crowd, the radical feminists, the homosexuals, the abortionists, the occultists, the radical Moslems, and the communists..."

What's wrong with that statement? Isn't there a glaring omission? Isn't something conspicuously absent? You bet there is! The only group that hates born again Christians - which the author left out - is the Jews. Why did he leave out the most important segment of Christian-bashers? Let us guess; there are several alternatives.

(1) His publication could not survive an attack by such Jewish organizations as the ADL and many others.

(2) His publication could not survive a "boycott" by Christians and others who support the idea that Jews are God's chosen.

(3) He is one of those who look upon the Jews as God's chosen and seeks to help them.

If number one is correct his predicament is understandable but he at least should not mention other groups that are less antagonistic toward Christians than are Jews. In fact, world-wide Jewish leadership is largely responsible for the success of many of the groups mentioned such as feminists, homosexuals, socialists, communists and the New World Order crowd.

If number two is correct he should follow the course advised for number one.

If number three is correct then he is deliberately misleading his readers. This is very serious.

Or let us suppose that he is simply ignorant of hidden facts of history and current events. If this is the case he should listen to those Christians who are trying to inform him. If he brushes aside their knowledge he is in fact in position number three.

In any case those who actively or passively aid and abet Jewish leaders are not qualified to advise Americans on the core problems facing us. This is sad but true. [Just to name a few: The John Birch Society and their "New American"; Don McAlvany and his "MIA"; ALL syndicated talk show hosts ESPECIALLY RUSH LIMBAUGH (discussed by SMYRNA below); Huntington House publishers; MOST of the so-called Christian writers and speakers such as Pat Robertson; Billy Graham; Chuck Colson; TBN; CBN; and even Gary Kah; and , even though William Cooper put the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" in his book, he falsly and erroneously claimed that they were not of Jewish origin, which they most certainly were. -BeWISE]

Return to Table of Contents


At this juncture we may make a lot of people mad at us. Rush Limbaugh is very popular and this writer agrees with about 95% of what he says. [Far more than us here at BeWISE!] But he also aids and abets those who are destroying the country. Here's how:

Mr. Limbaugh continually defends the Republican Party and especially Ronald Reagan. And while it is true that the Republican Party platform is vastly more moral than the Democratic Party platform, Republican leaders have trucked along with world conspirators as much as Democrats. Reagan, for example, ran up the highest budget deficit of any president, but that's for eight years. Bush's administration did almost as bad in just four years.(16) These deficits are great for the international banker world planners.

(16) Figgie, Jr., Harry E., "Bankruptcy 1995", Lttle, Brown & Co., 1992-1993, p. 42.

Rush is the establishment's token conservative on TV. If the controllers of the establishment media did not want him there he wouldn't last five minutes. He can rail against liberals and Democrats all he pleases, but he will not say anything against conspiracies and those who plan them. Thus his huge following, although well meaning, will never solve the problems of the nation. For that matter, solving the budget deficit will not end our problems, either. Our problems are primarily spiritual, moral and ignorance, and until many more Americans understand enough about causes and effects we will continue to go down hill. As much as we enjoy Limbaugh's expose's of liberal trash, it must be recognized that he is too close to the Israel firsters. But we still like his show!

Return to Table of Contents


Mrs. President is even more leftist than anyone has suspected. According to Herb Caen of the "San Francisco Chronicle" of 11/12/92 (via Howard Phillips' "Issues and Strategy Bulletin" of May 31,1993), Hillary worked as a law clerk in the Oakland office of the noted left- wing lawyer, Robert Treuhaft, husband of Jessica Mitford, herself a known leftist. This was in 1971 when Hillary was a law student at Yale.

Hillary wanted a job for the summer in one of the extant movements such as draft resisters, civil rights, etc. Treuhaft remembers that they were representing the Black Panthers at the time, and Hillary Rodham worked on the case. This was when the Panthers invaded the California State Legislature with guns and disrupted it. Treuhaft said some people think she went to Sacramento with them, but he's not sure whether she did or not.

Actually, both Treuhafts were notorious Communists. Jessica, born in England, married Esmond Romilly, a Communist, and the two went off to Spain in 1935 to fight alongside the Reds in the Civil War.

In 1939 they moved to the U.S. Her husband was killed in World War Two and she later married Treuhaft.(17)

(17) Gannon, Francis X., "Biographical Dictionary of the Left", Vol. 1, Western Islands, 1969.

These are the kinds of people that attracted Hillary Rodham in her younger years. Has she changed? Yes, she has matured in her left-wing, communist-oriented faith.

Nancy Reagan had her guru also - (Joan Quigley, astrologer)
and Ronnie baby was influenced by them.

It seems now that she and husband Bill have a guru in the person of Michael Lemer, Jewish editor of "TIKKUN" magazine, published by the Institute for Labor & Mental Health, 251 W. 100th St., New York, NY 10025, 212-864-4110. Their former address was in Oakland, CA; they moved about a year and a half ago. On CNN news 2/7/91, in discussing anti-war protests (Gulf War) in San Francisco, he said liberal Jews were pulling out of the movement because there is a difference between this war and Vietnam. That figures. Jews did the same in the 1967 "Israel" war. Generally speaking, they opposed the Vietnam war because we were fighting the Communists. But the moment "Israel" is the central issue they side with her.

The 6/22/93 issue of "Courier Mall" of Sidney, Australia published a brief report on Lemer and Tikkun:

It is an eccentric cult, a Jewish heresy with 1960's campus Marxism thrown in. Bill and Hillary "...have been drawing their philosophical inspiration..." for 5 years from it.

In the early 70's Lemer led the Seattle Liberation Front, an ultra-left organization and was indicted "...for a violent assault on a US federal courthouse..." Lemer and Tikkun hate the current distribution of wealth and power, our racist society, the oppression of homosexuals, and big spending on defense.

Tikkun was begun in 1986 with $1 million from Nan Fink, a drug-store heiress whom Lemer married but divorced in 3 years. Before that he cohabited with one of his students who bore his child. At their "cohabitation ceremony" the cake was decorated with the words "Smash Monogamy"... Mr Lemer and his ilk helped to tear down the pillars of traditional society a quarter of a century ago.

"What are we to make of a presidential couple, a Baptist and a Methodist, dipping into the heresies of other religions?"

Hillary is a member of First United Methodist Church of Little Rock. That denomination is one of the most liberal church bodies in America. It is interesting that many ideologues such as leftists, homosexuals, extreme feminists, et al., desire to call themselves Christians. They have thoroughly infiltrated liberal Christendom. Why did they not establish a new movement for themselves and name it something other than "Christian"? Why do they want to be known as Christians? They have almost nothing in common with Biblical Christianity. SMYRNA can think of only one reason: they want to disrupt and destroy from within. They wish to create controversy and thereby mislead the public.

Return to Table of Contents


In the Feb. issue of SMYRNA we stated: "Regardless of the pointed things we publish about people and issues, we harbor no ill will toward any person of any race or religion."

One recipient of Smyrna asked:

"How can we harbor no ill will towards Talmudic Judaism as a religion when it is of Satan? As Karl Marx rightfully pointed out, a world without Judaism is one with no human Jews. The hateful and wicked things of a religion are carried out by humans. Does not God hate the wicked? Should we love the wicked?"

This is a good question. What is a Christian to do about those who are hateful? Our supreme example is Jesus. As He was dying on the cross He uttered: "Father forgive them for they know not what they do."(18) Many people probably wish that Jesus hadn't said such a thing because the human inclination is to hate one's enemies. We just don't spontaneously love those who try to destroy us.

(18) Luke 23:34

But the key to grasping how we can love and not hate our enemies is the proper understanding of the above verse. [*]

[*] BeWISE was unable to insert the proper Greek characters that the original contained ... They are signified by "- - - - - "

The Greek phrase "- - - - - - - -" ("for they know not") in this passage in the Gospel of Luke uses the Greek verb "- - " (English "know") which generally implies a head knowledge, not an experiential knowledge. Experiential knowledge is generally translated from the Greek verb "- - - -". Jesus was in effect saying that they did not have a reflective knowledge (their souls had not been exercised) of what they were doing, even though they knew perfectly well what their physical acts were. They simply did not comprehend the magnitude of their crime! That's why He asked the Father to forgive them.

There is a tremendous lesson to be learned from this. Contrast for a moment the acts of a child from those of a normal adult. Children possess the cognitive ability to empirically experience their environment, but they may not have the foggiest notion of the serious consequences of their acts. Thus the Jews who condemned Jesus, and the Romans who performed the physical acts of execution (with the possible exception of one Roman) had not been "touched in their hearts" regarding this heinous crime. While that did not excuse them, Jesus recognized the potential for repentance. This is why Smyma stated that we harbor no ill will toward any person, regardless of race or religion.

Another favorite verse whose concept is parallel is John 3:16: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." Question: If God hates sin, how can He love the world? The Apostle John stated: "Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world..."(19) The Apostle Paul admonished us thusly: "For the wages of sin is death..."(20) One can easily see that God separates sin from the sinner's potential for repentance.

(19) I John 2:15.

(20) Rom. 6:23.

Therefore, when we speak of loving one's enemies it's a love for their souls, not an agreement with their beliefs or actions. In spite of modern evangelical "love potions" in the form of "smile, God loves you", or "Good news America, God loves you",(21) God does not love the world nor America with all of their black deeds. He DOES love the souls (the potentially new creatures) of all people. He even loved the souls of Jenghiz Khan, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Mao tse Tung, and He loves the souls of Saddam Hussein, Menachem Begin, Yitzhak Rabin, Teddy Kennedy, Alan Greenspan, Bill and Hillary Clinton, and all of the other immoral/criminal leaders of this doomed world. And, friend, He loves your soul and mine. We may not have committed serious crimes as some have, but we have nevertheless fallen far short of His perfection and are just as lost as the worst criminal unless we have repented. Unrepentant souls desperately need reconciliation with God. Marvelously, this is an accomplished fact via the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and all we need to do is appropriate it by belief, repentance and acceptance. Praise Him whose majesty transcends all that we can imagine!

(21) A few years ago Southern Baptist churches erected signs on church properties with this content, and distributed New Testaments by this title.


Last month we printed a special announcement inside the cover of SMYRNA. It stated that we were throwing in the towel as far as the publishing of the newsletter was concerned. We then confused many of you by crossing the announcement out.

We had reached a place where we thought we just couldn't continue under the present arrnngements - overnead nearly as high as income, with broken equipment and little money for research. So we placed the special announcement in SMYRNA and sent it to the printer.

However, after second thoughts and the tremendous encouragement of a few friends, your publisher decided not to quit. When we got the newsletter back from the printer the only thing we could do was to cross out the announcement. We have thus far received some encouraging letters and telephone calls. SMYRNA has a few wonderful supporters who contribute more than the price of a subscription. Subscriptions barely pay for the cost of a publication. Most newspapers continue publication because they sell advertisements. The only products SMYRNA has for sale are our booklets and pamphlets. These help us to stay in business. [END]

[BeWISE is extremely thankful that SMYRNA was able to hang in...We THANK YHWH God for people like the people at SMYRNA, whose understanding of our REAL physical enemies is eye opening. Their contributions to Truth are supremely precious and we will continue to pray for them and encourage readers to help support us however they are able... THANK YOU & MAY GOD BLESS YOU!

Return to Top
o Back to Apostasy
o Go to May 1994

Courtesy and care of: Be Wise As Serpents BBS
International Christian Educational Services