SMYRNA - January 1995

SMYRNA

E-MAIL: JereM541@aol.com

JANUARY 1995



TABLE OF CONTENTS:

o Blind Science vs Blind Faith - Theory of "EVILution"
o Outlandish Beliefs
o Sin Is Too Enticing
o Moles Exposed in NRA
o Searching for Jesus - New Testament Revisionism
o Sweet Justice
o Holy Laughter?!
o Bible Belt Brashness
o Truth - Always a Casualty of War
o There Oughta Be a Law


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?

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.


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.

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.


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.

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.


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.

(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.


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).

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.


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?

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.


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

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.


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.

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.


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."

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?


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
o Back to Apostasy
o Go to Febuary 1995


Courtesy and care of: Be Wise As Serpents BBS
International Christian Educational Services
bewise@pixi.com