SMYRNA
E-MAIL: JereM541@aol.com
Carl Sagan, Jewish astronomer at Cornell University, probably
is the popular champion of all who doubt the existence of God.
Recently, on the Dennis Prager TV show (Dennis is a conservative
Jew), Sagan played the same old tune, i.e., that Earth is a small
planet in the orbit of a third-rate star which is in an insignificant
arm of only one of "bilyuns and bilyuns" of galaxies.
He said it is hilarious (we're pretty sure that's the word he
used) for us to think that we are so important. This lack of
importance issue is a direct reference to some Christians' belief
that humans are the epitome of God's creation - we are the end
product of His plan and all other things in the beginning were
for our benefit and enjoyment.
All ideas, however, are based on at least one assumption, and
Sagan's idea is no exception. Sagan and company are enamored
of physical dimensions, and who isn't awe-struck by the enormity
and grandeur of the universe? But whose opinion is so infallible
as to authoritatively announce that a Creator would possess the
same value system? It seems that Sagan anthropomorphizes God,
a practice that he and colleagues usually assign to us. According
to the Bible, the cosmological values of non-believers are at
odds with its God. The Apostle Paul stated: "For who among
men knows the thoughts of a man except the spirit of the man,
which is in him? Even so the thoughts of God no one knows except
the Spirit of God." (I Cor 2:11, NASB). Paul wrote that
spiritual things are discerned by spiritual people, but the natural
person thinks this is foolishness. Carl Sagan assumes that the
relative insignificance of Earth as a physical body demonstrates
our nothingness.
From one perspective Sagan is correct. The Psalmist said, "When
I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, The moon and
the stars, which Thou hast ordained; What is man, that Thou dost
take thought of him?" (Psa. 8:3-4) Compared to the magnificence
of God's total handiwork, people are seemingly unimportant. However-!
The Psalmist went on to declare that God put the other creatures
on earth under the supervision of man (generic term for both sexes).
The entire Bible is replete with evidence of God's care for man's
physical and spiritual welfare, giving priority to the spiritual.
The latter is the constituent that non-believers overlook.
SMYRNA recognizes that the introduction of biblical evidences
into the argument is unacceptable to those who live by the code
of empiricism alone, but even they should admit that man's essence
is more than physical. As Dr. Dallas Willard noted in his article
Blind Science vs. Blind Faith: Some Thoughts on Breaking
the Deadlock,(1) those who invoke physics are "...surrounded
constantly with things and events for which no physical explanation
yet exists, nor even the beginnings of one... A most obvious case
is the existence of the physical universe itself, as well as of
life and human consciousness." Willard is right on target.
And he is especially refreshing in his observation that chance
is not a valid answer when asked how all these "things"
got here. He stated that chance is "...invoked precisely
at the point where there is no known explanation or cause. And
if something is, indeed, impossible, it will not help to have
more time to get it done."
(1) Facts & Faith. 4th Qtr 1994, Box 5978, Pasadena,
CA 91117
My, how we love his logic! Way back in this writer's early years
of feeble attempts to defend Christian beliefs, he wrote a short
piece on whether or not great gobs of time would be sufficient
to accomplish evolution. He recalls his botany professor in college
saying, "Give us another hundred million years." But
time is no help at all for evolution. Whether "milyuns,
bilyuns" or "trilyuns" of years pass, if mechanisms
for evolution are absent, nothing will occur.
Let's compare the problem to thrnwing dice. Mathematicians have
calculated the
chances of throwing any combination of numbers. This is the science
of probability. Sagan argues that there must be other planets
"Out there" capable of sustaining life because there
are so many "trilyuns" of stars. He is gambling on
the law of probability. But referring back to the dice, if there
are no dice to throw then no numbers will ever turn up. Likewise,
if the mechanisms for evolution are non-existent, the law of probability
doesn't apply regardless of the number of stars.
Furthermore, if the Creator didn't desire to create life elsewhere,
the non-believers' arguments are moot. Their only claim to validity
is their exclusion of a Creator. And that returns us to the subject
of spirituality. Spirit cannot be empirically understood. In
the final analysis theism and nontheism are destined for continual
conflict because they travel on different tracks. Even so, Sagan
and friends are ultimately devoid of a workable scheme because
they have based their whole argument on the probability of evolution
having occurred. If they're incorrect, their faith is no different
than that of other religious gurus.
At least the Christian faith is based on the empirical evidence
that Christ rose from the dead. Empirical evidence? Yes, empirical
evidence by proxy. Thomas the doubter and hundreds of others
witnessed the historical event and gave testimony to its physical
validity. No evolutionist can produce proxy testimony of similar
character. Who was around to see the primordial soup produce
living cells? Who produced written records of eye witness accounts
of the changes from the "common ancestors" of the chimpanzees
to humans? No one.
Do many Christians also fall back on lame answers to honest questions?
Yes. Often it is because of their unwillingness to say, "I
don't know." No human knows everything. When we don't have
an answer, we should say so. Some Christians are just too dogmatic.
This writer viewed a church pastor on TV recently who was giving
a series of messages on the Book of the Revelation. He concluded,
for example, that the New Jerusalem will be a literal city whose
walls will be 375 miles long and high. And he proclaims that
they must be that enormous because the fire that God will use
to burn everything outside the city will consume the saved people
within if they aren't protected by the walls. While it is not
Smyrna's intent to critique his interpretation here, this is a
good example of just how dogmatic some Christians can be. There
is little wonder that dogmatic religionists and dogmatic scientists
clash. Each has decided that the other is wrong. But most Christians
have no excuse for being ignorant of the foundations of our faith,
and we should not take a position that we cannot reasonably defend
with courtesy. Even those who hold bizarre beliefs should not
be personally attacked.
Who is Frank Tipler? He is a physicist. Who dared to publish
such a seemingly nonsensical book? Is it some sci-fi promoter?
A "Tales From the Crypt" type? Not at all. It's Doubleday!
And Facts & Faith says they paid Tipler half a million bucks
before publication. Obviously, Doubleday thinks the books will
sell. Our culture being what it is, so do we.
The hypocrisy and racism in this matter get under our skin.
Black racists and leftist lawyers are praised for defending Communists,
homosexuals and mass murderers, and for litigation against Christians,
but apparently American citizens who are members of the KKK and
White Aryan Resistance have no Constitutional rights. Lawyers
such as William Kunstler, Robert Treuhaft (with whom Hillary Rodham
worked), Alan Dershowitz and others who have long records of leftist
legal involvements, are the kosher darlings of the politically
correct.
As SMYRNA stated in last month's issue, this kind of gross
hypocrisy is what makes racists and "anti-Semites" out
of otherwise unprejudiced people. But we must not allow that.
We must continue to publish the truth and let the likes of Cottrol
and Kaplan bear the burden of racism and bigotry.
But the matter with the NRA raises a question about its ability
to screen its top people. Why are Robert Cottrol and David Kaplan
on NRA's Board? It is obvious that their Constitutional and civil
rights views are not compatible with the overwhelming majority
of NRA's members, nor even of the rest of the Board. Influential
misfits in the NRA may be one of the reasons why organizations
such as the American Pistol and Rifle Association (APRA) were
formed.(2)
(2) Route 2, Box 164, Benton, TN 37307.
CAUSE Foundation asked SMYRNA to run its ad asking for
support from the public in its suit against Janet Reno, et al.
It appears on page 6. [Please see hard copy from SMYRNA --BeWISE]
Although we might not have chosen the same
wording for the ad, we believe they have made their point well
and deserve the publicity.
(3) Archeological Institute of America, 135 William St., N.Y.,
NY 10038, Nov./Dec. 1994
The introduction mentions John Dominic Crossan of DePaul University
and Richard Horsley of the University of Massachusetts as two
whose works are entirely compatible with Silberman's conclusions.
Crossan, who co-founded the Jesus Seminar with Robert Funk of
the Westar Institute (4) is a former Catholic priest who teaches
at DePaul, a Catholic school. He is one of the most active revisionists
in the world.
(4) Sonoma, CA
But let's get back to Neil Silberman, the Jewish author of the
article at hand. His hypothesis that Jesus was not the person
whom the New Testament describes is based mainly on subjective
criteria. This is usually the case with non-biblicists. For
example, a story in the New York Times called An Evolving
Scripture, reported by Christian News Encyclopedia Vol. 5
page 4009-4010, the Times stated:" 'For two centuries
...scholars have been trying to sort out what they felt could
be factually established about Jesus from what they felt were
the religiously inspired elaborations or interpretations owed
to His followers.
" 'Along with evolution, the issue of modern Biblical scholarship
has divided American Protestantism into fundamentalist and liberal
camps.' "(Emphasis added)
Note three things: Modern scholarship is the fountainhead
of New Testament revisionism, based on what its adherents have
felt needed changing, and it has been a companion to evolutionism.
We might add too that Catholicism has also been split into liberal
and conservative camps.
To reduce all this to simple terms, we can say that non-believers
began to express their heresies openly and in greater numbers
beginning with the so-called Enlightenment. They began to hone
their rationalizations into razor-sharp skills - a practice known
to Jews as pil pul.
SMYRNA has no objection to honest inquiry whether in history
or the physical and biological sciences. What we object to are
the unwarranted dogmas resulting from pil pul. Silberman has
combined the opinions of social anthropologists and gleanings
from minute archeological finds to arrive at conclusions that
"...the original teachings of Jesus were deeply affected
by...social stresses intensified by oppressive Roman rule."
(p.31) Silberman did not overlook the opportunity to advertise
the Jewish claim that the Romans crucified Jesus. This is technically
true, but the Roman procurator Pontius Pilate would not have done
so without extreme pressure from Jewish leaders.
Silberman: "...many Dead Sea Scroll documents.. in combination
with evolving New Testament studies, offer surprising insights
into the cultural context and possible motivations of Jesus and
his early followers." His phrase "evolving New Testament
studies" is revealing. Of course they're "evolving",
just as man "evolved" from the primates, i.e., with
a tremendous amount of help from the "evolvers". And
we are not exactly surprised that sociologists, anthropologists
and even psycholo gists have gotten into the act, hypothesizing
that economic and cultural changes determined Jesus' motives.
Silberman cites Horsley who "goes even further in casting
Jesus and his followers as radical political activists."
As a Jew, Silberman of necessity concludes that the miracle stories,
Christological imagery and hostility to Judaism were gradually
woven into New Testament accounts.
The Old Testament does not escape the jaundiced eyes of these
critics, either. According to Silbenman, the Israelite conquest
of Canaan was a "dramatic demographic shift, not a concerted
military campaign". We're just tickled to learn that Joshua
was God's man of the hour who selected the best warriors from
the tribes in order to dramatically "shift" his people
from the desert wilderness into the land of milk and honey. God
must have said to Joshua: "Now, Joshua, I don't want any
violence as you nonchalantly mosey into the territories of the
idolators. This must be a sociological experiment to learn whether
the Canaanites are gonna love me more than Baal. If they choose
Baal, then we'll just have to live with it."
The Dead Sea Scrolls are intriguing evidence for Silberman "...for
a new understanding of early Christianity. Unlike the New Testament,
which has undergone centuries of ecclesiastical editing, this
huge cache of...texts...is the only contemporary manuscript evidence
of religious thought from first-century Judea that is available
to us." (p.32) Although he cites the Jewish historian Josephus
he doesn't believe that he delved into early Christian life, which,
of course, is true. Josephus wrote a history of Israel and the
Jews, not of Christianity. But he did mention Jesus "who
was called Christ" (4) And he wrote about the four parties
that were active, i.e., the Pharisees, Saducees, Essenes and the
newest one which he did not name but is now known to have been
the Zealots. It was the Zealots who caused the rebellion against
Rome and who caused the internal slaughter during the siege.
(4) Antiquities, XX, IX, 1.
Silberman's article in Archeology quoted from one of the
Dead Sea Scrolls: "The heavens and the earth will obey His
Messiah... he will release the captives, make the blind see, and
raise up the downtrodden... he will heal the sick, resurrect the
dead, and announce glad tidings to the poor." This is so
similar to the messianic prophecy of Isaiah (61:1-3) that it may
as well have been a quotation. Jesus referred to this prophecy
when John the Baptist asked Him whether or not He was Messiah.
He in effect told John that He fulfilled that prophecy, that
He was Messiah. This was recorded by Matthew at 11:4-5. Did
the author of that portion of the Dead Sea Scrolls reiterate this
prophecy before or after Jesus' ministry?
Silberman says that the Dead Sea Scrolls are trustworthy but
that the New Testament isn't; he says it underwent centuries of
"ecclesiastical editing". This libels the Church and
flies in the face of known history. SMYRNA distrusts the
present crop of Dead Sea Scroll interpreters because they have
an axe to grind; the axe of destruction used against the Bible.
The real purpose behind Neil Silberman's article is to allege
that Jesus and His disciples were part of a religious/political
movement against Rome. This allegation, as propaganda, enables
them to claim that Jesus was crucified by the Romans and the Jews
were not responsible. By discrediting all of Jesus' credentials
as the Messiah, they will, in effect, destroy Christianity, for
Christianity is based solely and squarely on His virgin birth
and physical resurrection. If they can remold Him into merely
a dissident Jew who siphoned off some of their followers and also
angered Rome, they will have accomplished their objective. As
Silberman states, "The archeological and historical reexamination
of the birth of Christianity are part of a larger intellectual
movement." (p.32). They may dub it as intellectual, but
in reality it is propaganda masquerading as scholarship.
What is scholarship? First and foremost it is the desire to
be accurate and truthful. No amount of learning can meet the criteria
of true scholarship unless character is involved. Intelligence
plus training are requisites but honesty is indispensable. Cleverness
mixed with rationalizing are immoral and unacceptable.
As we read Silberman's article we were struck by his acknowledgment
of certain evidences that point to traditional Christian teachings,
and yet he interprets them in a skewed manner. For example, he
refers to Robert Eisenman of California State University who believes
that early Christians were members of the community that produced
the Scrolls, and that their "Teacher of Righteousness"
was none other than James the Just, Jesus' brother. However,
Silberman believes that the Scrolls are evidence of Christianity's
roots in Jewish apocalypticism, a "larger religio-political
movement in first-century Judea whose purpose was to resist the
cultural, political, and economic tyranny of Rome." He says
that "...the expectation of God's impending intervention
in human history apparently provided a vast cross section of the
Judean and Galilean population with a religious rationale for
open revolt against Rome in A.D. 66." The radicals won over
the moderates and the rebellion began.
SMYRNA believes that Silberman's interpretation of first century
Christian history is S.O.P. for Jews who want to cast Jesus as
a revolutionary. They are correct that a movement of zealots
was keenly alive in Jesus' time. Some of them came to Him and
asked if it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. His famous reply
was, "render then the things of Caesar to Caesar, and the
things of God to God." (Matt. 22:21) Jesus was definitely
not one of the Zealots. Furthermore, He warned His followers
to get Out of Jerusalem when they saw the abomination of desolation
which was the Roman Army surrounding the city (Luke 21:20). This
occurred in A.D. 66. They fled to Pella and escaped the conflagration.
The Jews never forgave them for this; they called them traitors.
From the gist of Silberman's piece in Archeology, we would
guess that whoever wrote many of the Dead Sea Scrolls understood
that the Old Testament predicted Messiah's advent. The entire
book of Isaiah was recovered and it matches the text that we have
today. And even though Silberman, Crossan, et al., read into
the artifacts their own biases, it appears that their observations
that Jesus and His disciples grew up in a partially, Romanized
culture whose religious aspects they did not practice is correct.
What's so new about that? They also rejected the Jewish religion.
Efforts by New Testament revisionists to reduce early Christianity
to part of a rebellion against Rome are in truth fruitless. Jesus
came to save the world, not to lead a local Jewish faction in
an unsuccessful attempt to overthrow mighty Rome. Silberman and
others reject the compassionate imploring of Jesus to "Come
unto me all you who labor and are heavy laden and I will give
you rest." (Matt. 11:28) Jewish revisionists reject Jesus'
lament over Jerusalem: "0 Jerusalem! Jerusalem!...How often
would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth
her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" (Matt. 23:37)
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten
son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have
everlasting life." (John 3:16)
As stern as SMYRNA is toward Jewish error and implacability,
we do not hate them, but rather urge them to consider the claims
of Jesus. He was either who He said He was (Messiah and Savior
of the world) or He was the greatest faker ever to live. He could
not have been both! To claim that He was only a great moral human
is a contradiction in terms.
During her lecture in Atlanta, Lipstadt, according to an account
in Christian News of Jan. 2, 1995, denounced Irving as "'not
really a historian"'. Unknown to her, Irving was in the
audience, and at question and answer time he informed her and
the audience that he was the person whom she had denigrated.
He loudly pointed out her factual errors about the "holocaust"
and offered the students free copies of his books and $1,000 to
Lipstadt if she could produce the blueprint of the alleged gas
chambers about which she spoke.
From Irving's perspective the outcome of the whole episode was
glorious. Students flocked around him, received his books, and
listened to him at length after the meeting. The whole affair
was videotaped. One of the organizers of the meeting challenged
Irving and his photographer about permission to photograph Lipstadt,
but they simply stated that the video was protection for Lipstadt
as well as Irving in case slander suits were brought.
Warren Smith, writer for SCP Newsletter, begins his article
on "holy laughter" in the Fall 1994 issue with this
account: "I watched the video again. It was entitled Signs
and Wonders Campmeeting 1994. Pastors of huge charismatic
churches were stumbling around the church stage 'drunk' with 'holy'
laughter. Wanting to testiiy to the fact that 'holy' laughter
had transformed their ministries and their lives, many of them
were unable to speak when called on to do so. But their 'drunken'
condition becarne their testimony. Their halting speech was seen
as proof of the 'power of the spirit' that had come over them."
Smith says the "congregation roared in approval as pastor
after pastor laughed uncontrollably and then fell to the floor."
Many of the people lost consciousness for several hours.
Smith pinpoints evangelist Rodney Howard-Browne as the fountainhead
from whom this "revival" began. Charisma magazine
revealed that the evangelist, while praying in South Africa for
a deeper experience with God, had said: "either You come
down here and touch me, or I will come up there and touch You."
Suddenly his whole body felt like it was on fire and he began
to laugh uncontrollably. From there he began to impart the experience
to others by touching them. It seems that anyone can get it by
being touched for that purpose.
Both Trinity Broadcasting Network and Pat Robertson of the 700
Club have endorsed "holy laughter." But Warren Smith
gives 14 reasons why Christians should look very closely at this
phenomenon and examine the Bible thoroughly before accepting it
at face value. It just might be from Satan rather than from God.
SMYRNA highly recommends the SCP article and suggests that our
readers contact SCP for a copy of the quarterly newsletter (Volume
19:2). Their address is Spiritual Counterfeits Project, Box 4308,
Berkeley, CA 94704.
Rush Limbaugh quipped in reply: "Good Lord! And they call
Republicans mean-spirited."
SMYRNA called the Rev. G. Avery Lee who is now retired
at his home in New Orleans. He said that the above quotation
is precisely what he wrote to Timemagazine which was printed
Dec. 5, 1994. He said it was intended as humor, but that it represents
his dissatisfaction with the performance of Mr. Gingrich. SMYRNA
suspects that it may represent a generation whose loyalties to
the Democrat Party were of the same caliber as its loyalties to
being Baptist, Methodist, Church of Christ, etc. - "I'm a
Democrat just 'cause I'm a Democrat, and I'm a Baptist just 'cause
I'm a Baptist." This doesn't speak well for moral principles.
Perhaps the Bible Belt never really comprehended a world view
that demands principles. That may be the biggest reason why the
Church failed the Blacks of the South in the deeper things of
life. But, then, it continues to fail us in these matters.
Is Newt Gingrich another enigma in our world of conflicting and
contusing ideologies? We listen to him as he expounds his ideas
of what government ought to be. What he says is consistent in
the main with the founding fathers and the Constitution. What
he says is refreshing.
But what about his past? Has he changed since his earlier days
or is he a chameleon? According to The New American as
reported in A.I.N., (5) Gingrich has strong environmental connections,
he labored to pass GATT, supports the homosexual agenda, helped
elevate EPA to Cabinet-level status, supported a homosexual candidate
in Wisconsin, supported Jewish homosexual Barney Frank when Frank
was threatened with censure in the House for allowing a homosexual
prostitution ring to be run from his home, etc. [Recent mountains
of evidence has since shown Newt Gingrich to be the traitor
to America that he is...he is definitely *NOT* a loyal American
by *ANY* stretch of the imagination!! ---BeWISE]
(5) American Information Newsletter, Box 44534, Boise,
ID 83711
As for his activism in the late '60's at Tulane when he defended
the student newspaper's right to publish a nude photo of a faculty
member, we can forgive him IF he repented at a later date. However,
his present associations and actions that run counter to his stated
beliefs must be examined and revealed.
Newt is a member of New Hope Baptist Church in Fayetteville,
GA, a church with about 5,000 members which is associated with
the Southern Baptist Convention. However, we must not blame
his home church for any of his reported beliefs and actions.
For example, Bill Clinton's home church in Little Rock disagrees
with him on several issues of moral significance and we would
suspect that Gingrich's church does, also.
Take the case of Christina Jeffrey. She was hired by Newt Gingrich
as House historian but ran afoul of the hidden power structure
within a week. Gingrich was pressured into firing her. Why was
she fired? According to the San Francisco Chronicle of
Jan. 11, 1995, her unforgiveable sin was that she wanted to present
a balanced view of history - nine years ago! In 1986 Jeffrey
headed a panel that reviewed the "Holocaust" for the
U.S. Department of Education She wrote her opinion: "'The
program gives no evidence of balance or objectivity. The Nazi
point of view, however unpopular, is still a point of view and
is not presented, nor is that of the Ku Klux Klan'" With
that kind of blalance she's fortunate she wasn't mobbed.
This is just one more example of Jewish clout. Although Gingrich
is pro-Israel, it doesn't matter in circumstances like this.
The pressure was too much. The Chronicle stated that Democrat
sources tipped off the media about Jeffrey's "impolitic"
remarks that she made back in 1986 and Gingrich's office was queried.
Obviously, the Congressman couldn't afford to have this millstone
around his neck; he knew that the Jewish activists would never
let it rest, and they pretty much control the mass media.
Christina Jeffrey should be commended for being a true historian.
But if the history books write about this incident she will probably
be excoriated as a neo-Nazi who managed to infiltrate a Congressman's
office until discovered by the oppressed Jewish community which
then performed a great service to the nation by exposing her.
Why do we need a new balanced budget law? Sen. Robert Dole said
on TV that the bill would simply state that the budget must be
balanced. But that's what the present one requires. Will this
be another pacifier?
Blind Science vs Blind Faith
Ever since the so-called Enlightenment era of history began,
the Bible and Christian history have been questioned by avant
garde freethinkers. Science started coming into its own and pseudo-science
has now preempted Christian teaching regarding origins. Some
scientists have become "theologians". Faith to them
is synonymous with ignorance which produces prejudice in believers.
Does God exist? Are we the most important entity in the universe?
Return to Table of Contents
OUTLANDISH BELIEFS
Speaking of bizarre beliefs, Facts & Faith newsletter briefly
reviewed a book by Frank Tipler entitled, The Physics of immortality:
Modern Cosmology, God, and the Resurrection of the Dead. Whew!
Some title. Tipler, according to Hugh Ross, president of Reasons
to Believe, publishers of the newsletter, believes that God "...does
not yet exist and he is not a person. . . the same self-generating
mechanisms at work in nature that have brought about the existence
of the human mind will continue to operate until humanity and
the universe itself evolves into an onmipotent, omniscient, omnipresent
Entity." Advancing computer technology, says Tipler, currently
doubles its capacity every 18 months, and will in some billions
of years alter the universe and laws of physics. All knowledge
will be synthesized, the memory banks of every person who ever
lived will be recovered, destructive thoughts will be purged and
all will live forever. Actually, his description is somewhat
of a parallel to the Bible's account of the resurrection of the
dead and eternity, except Tipler's hypothesis circumvents the
need of a Savior, judgment, and hell.
Return to Table of Contents
SIN IS TOO ENTICING
The number one obstacle to receiving the Bible as authoritative
is sin. The Bible requires repentance for salvation and eternal
life with God and the natural human heart finds that undesirable.
Therefore, prayer and the work of the Holy Spirit are needed
in order for the heart to submit to God so that it may be changed.
Return to Table of Contents
Moles Exposed in NRA
CAUSE Foundation, in its newsletter The Balance, Dec.
1994, has revealed two moles operating on the Board of Directors of the National Rifle
Association (NRA). In an article subtitled NRA Snatches Defeat
from the Jaws of Victory, CAUSE named Robert J. Cottrol, a
black law professor at Rutgers University and David Kaplan as
the two who sabotaged a grant from NRA's Firearms Civil Rights
Defense Fund. CAUSE Foundation sought a grant from NRA to sue
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF), the FBI, and
Janet Reno for their use of excessive force, violations and negligence
in the Branch Davidian and Randy Weaver cases. NRA's Board voted
unanimously to grant the money ($50,000) but later reneged because
of the ruckus being raised by Collrol and Kaplan. What happened?
Cottrol and Kaplan learned that CAUSE Foundation in the past
had defended such clients as the KKK and Tom Metzger of the White
Aryan Resistance organization, and that's a no-no in the eyes
of black racists and Jewish leftists. Because of board members
Cottrol and Kaplan, NRA backed Out. As of this writing the board's
final decision is in limbo.
Return to Table of Contents
Searching for Jesus
New Testament Revisionism
" 'The heavens and the earth will obey His Messiah...
he will release the captives, make the blind see, and raise up
the downtrodden...he will heal the sick, resurrect the dead,
and announce glad tidings to the poor.'-from Dead Sea Scroll
text 4Q521, 'The Messianic Apocalypse' "
U.S.A. Television Network sponsors a regular ad against hate.
"Help Stamp Out Hate" is its theme and it runs brief clips of photos telling us
who the hate groups are. The KKK, the neo-Nazis and others are
depicted as the supreme haters in America. The "Christian
right" is also thought of as a hate group even though not
always verbalized. But what of those who hate Christians? Why
are they not named among the tainted? Once again we see the double
standard applied. Liberals are always the guys in the white hats-as
they see themselves. They are numbered with the "scholars"
and the politically correct. They write books and articles filled
with destructive opinions about Christianity, published by companies
whose agenda is to destroy Christianity. Recently an article
appeared in Archeology (3) entitled Searching for Jesus,
written by Neil Asher Silberman, a contributing editor. An introduction
was written by the Editor-in-Chief bearing the title Rethinking
the New Testament. Even the title insults Christians because
it implies that the New Testament, which is the foundation for
our faith, needs correcting. All of the correcting, of course,
emanates from its enemies.
Return to Table of Contents
SWEET JUSTICE
David Irving, British historian who has gleaned more information
from primary sources about World War Il and the so-called holocaust
than any other writer, was ecstatically avenged of Deborah Lipstadt
on Nov. 11, 1994 as she spoke to students in Atlanta. Lipstadt
is an instructor of Jewish and Holocaust Studies at Emory University,
Atlanta, and author of Denying the Holocaust, reportedly
a scathing denouncement of those who say that 6 million Jews were
not killed by the Germans in World War II. Her book has had very
favorable reviews in both secular and Christian publications.
Christianity Today provided syrupy coverage of it in a
review by Richard Pierard, professor at Indiana State University.
(See SMYRNA, May & June '94 issues).
Return to Table of Contents
HOLY LAUGHTER?
Is "holy laughter" a manifestation of blind faith by
Christians who are looking for empirical evidence of God and a
"feel good" experience? Are they substantially different
from Frank Tipler's type and others who have rejected the Bible?
Return to Table of Contents
BIBLE BELT BRASHINESS
The following was taken from The Limbaugh Letter of January
1995.
"When Congressman Newt Gingrich was a graduate student at
Tulane University, I baptized him by immersion into the member-ship
of the St. Charles Avenue Baptist Church. Perhaps I didn't hold
him under long enough." --The Rev. G. Avery Lee, Letter to
Time
Return to Table of Contents
TRUTH - Always a Casualty of War
Warfare rages all around us! But it is a war for the minds of
people, a war between truth and deceit, love and hate, compassion
and greed. Truth is always a casualty of war, and Washington,
DC has more than its share of enemy activity.
Return to Table of Contents
THERE OUGHTA BE A LAW!
Well, there is, according to a recent issue of Frontiers of
Freedom that printed a story from the Seattle Times
of March 30, 1979. Congress passed a bill to balance the budget
which was signed into law on Oct. 10, 1978 by President Carter.
It was to begin in fiscal 1981 when Reagan was president. So
said David Weil who at that time was the staff director and counsel
to the House Banking subcommittee on international trade, investment
and monetary, policy. According to Weil the bill passed by Congress
became Public Law 95-435, and Sec 7 stated: "Beginning with
fiscal year 1981, the total budget outlays of the federal government
shall not exceed its receipts."
THANK YOU
Smyrna again wishes to thank all of you who support us. There
are many efforts we make to educate people and support principled
causes in addition to our newsletter and booklets. Suffice it
to say that we are busy continually in this vein.
RELATIVISM
A turtle ran over a snail. When the snail was being treated in
the emergency room, he was asked what happened. "I don't
know" the snail replied. "It all happened so fast."
from Reminisce magazine
[Please E-Mail BeWISE with inquiries at address below. --BeWISE]
Return to Top
Courtesy and care of: Be Wise As Serpents BBS
International Christian Educational Services
bewise@pixi.com
