SMYRNA
E-MAIL: JereM541@aol.com
(1) Ministries, Inc., Montgomery, AL, 1982.
In claiming that the bar code is the mark of the beast, Relfe has begun with a preconceived idea and proceeded to misinterpret certain Bible passages as proof that her premise is correct. In the beginning of her book she writes about the developing economic climate and the coming cashless society. Her primary belief is stated at the outset:
"The Prophet John identified this Cashless System of Commerce 1900 years ago as one in which business would be transacted with a 'Mark' and a Number; the Mark will obviously be a Bar Code; the Number will be '666;' the combination of the two, about which you will read in this book, will be an integral part of the '666 System', another term for the Worid Government System destined to close out this present Age with a 7-year Totalitarian Regime, Daniel's 70th Week. Daniel 9:27." (p.xii)
We have no idea why she capitalized so many words, but this statement alone reveals that she has begun with incorrect assumptions and therefore her major conclusions will automatically be false.
"And he [the second beast] causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name."
How can one glean a cashless system from that? John simply stated that one could not buy or sell without the mark, the name, or the number. Nothing in the passage precludes paying with whatever medium of exchange is in vogue at the time. The absence of the mark would place one in a category without privilege irrespective of cash, card, chip, or whatever.
The second error in Relfe's statement is her hypothesis that "...the Mark will obviously be a Bar Code..." This statement is even more bizarre. It is typical of a provincial interpretation of the Bible which is common among subjectively motivated writers. The language of the Bible cannot be construed to identify such specific, technologically modern gadgetry.
Finally, her third error is her opinion that the "World Government System destined to close out this present Age" will hold sway for seven years, which she attributes to the prophecy of Daniel 9:27, the so-called "Daniel's 70th Week." This teaching, developed in the last two hundred years, is common among many well known Christian writers and TV personalities. It is a doctrine that many Christian scholars have exposed as unsound.
What did she mean by the expression "The book had been opened! Knowledge had been increased!"? Sadly, she unjustifiably connected two widely separated Bible verses (Dan. 12:4 and Rev. 5:5) and added her own subjective "revelation" as the final meaning of the two. In the former the prophet Daniel (ca. 550 B.C.) is told by the messenger from God to seal the book, i.e., the revelation just given to him, to the time of the end. The time of the end revealed to Daniel was the period from the first advent of Jesus Christ until the destruction of the temple and the commonwealth of Israel in A.D. 70 - not the end of the world! Study Daniel 9:24-27 carefully and obtain this writer's book "Pop" Prophecy. It is crucial to understand this.
In the next verse, Rev. 5:5, the risen Christ was the only one found worthy to open "the book" and undo its seven seals. This book is not the same one as the book of Daniel. This "book" contains predictions of future events from the time of the Apostle John (ca. A.D. 95). Therefore, for Relfe to claim that her "revelation" had anything to do with these two Scriptures is extreme error.
The minor part of her book is devoted to dealing with biblical prophecy, and she is obviously a dispensationalist. Dispensationalism is a system of doctrines whose roots are in the Jewish Talmud and ancient chiliasm (Jewish millennialism). One of its major fallacies is the dismembering of Daniel 9:24-27, popularly known as the "70 weeks of Daniel" We haven't the space here to develop a full explanation (read "Pop" Prophecy and Sfrong Delusion) but Bible teachers such as Dr. Relfe break off the "70th week" of Daniel and project it into the distant future to the time just preceding the second advent of Christ. They call it "the great tribulation" and the time of "Jacob's trouble" and they say it will be seven years long. Some of them believe that the rapture of believers will occur just prior to the seven years, while Relfe and others believe the rapture will happen in the middle of the seven years. Both are wrong, because the fulfillment of Daniel's "70th week" took place between the first advent and the destruction of the temple. The "great tribulation" foretold by Jesus (Matt. 24:21) has already occurred, and the "rapture"(2) that we await will be at the second advent of Christ.
(2) The word "rapture" doesn't occur in the Bible but is nearly equivalent to "caught away" in I Thess. 4:17.
There are two general considerations inherent in today's sensationalized, popularized "mark of the beast" versions. One pertains to the mark itself and the other to the consequences of possessing the mark. Both of these are capable of explanation without resorting to extra-biblical foolishness. First, however, let's remember that logical rules of interpretation must be applied to avoid error, otherwise our efforts would be the same as playing a game where the players make their own rules. These rules are called "hermeneutics". Unfortunately, Relfe claims personal revelation such as "...the Lord impressed me to write , and "The Lord quickened to me..."(p.231, et al.) Who can argue with such highly subjective "documentation"?
Here are some basic rules for correct Bible interpretation:
1. Private, personal interpretations are not allowed.
2. No major doctrine should be developed from a few unconnected passages.
3. Original languages must be consulted.
4. Historical and cultural settings must be taken into account.
5. The Old Testament must be filtered through the New Testament.
6. Wherever the New Testament comments upon the Old Testament, it is the final word.
7. Figures of speech and symbols must be noted, especially in eschatological passages.
These rules are not exhaustive. Fair minded people will see the wisdom of observing rules because any other approach breeds interpretive anarchy. Relfe and others do not observe these rules.
1. The number 666 is meant to be a personal, physical mark which, if taken, condemns the bearer to eternal damnation, and the bar code is that mark.
2. The "70th week" of Daniel 9:24-27 has not been fulfilled and will become the seven years long great tribulation.
3. Today's "Israel" is a reestablishment of ancient Israel.
4. A ten nation European federation will be a "revived Roman Empire" that leads to Armageddon.
If her conclusions about these four items are wrong, the purpose of her work will have become irrelevant, even destructive. Why destructive? Because her conclusions hide the motives, tactics, and identity of the real forces of world power described in the Revelation.
Many attempts have been made to identify the Anti-Christ by mathematical calculations using the number 666. These efforts were the result of a literal reading of Rev. 13:18 in the English language as translated in some versions such as the King James:
"Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six..."
Names such as Plato, Nero, one or more of the Popes, and in our time Henry Kissinger have yielded the sum of 666 when the letters of their names were given numerical values using Greek or Latin, each letter representing a number. This is hardly a scientific method because thousands of names in the world would fit the pattern. Our best approach is to return to the Greek in which the Revelation was written and look more closely. A literal translation of the Greek into English is:
"Here is wisdom. He who has understanding let him count the number of the beast: for number of man it is and the number of him 666."
Note the clause "...for number of man it is it is..." does not say a man. The Greek had no indefinite article but many translators supplied one because they believed that the beast was (will be) a man. In John 1:1, a passage with an identical application, the translators correctly did not supply an indefinite article for the clause "...and God was the Word" because it would have made Jesus out to be "a god" ("...and a god was the Word"). The Jehovah's Witnesses supply this indefinite article in their New World Translation because they do not accept Jesus Christ as deity.
In Rev. 13:18 it is therefore incorrect to translate "...for number of a man it is..." We must conclude that the number 666 refers to the essence of man. It is an intensification of natural man's humanistic, self sufficient arrogance in defiance of his Creator. Thus those who are "marked" with the number of the beast belong to the beast by choice. They are its servants. On the other hand, those who are not "marked" with 666 belong to Christ; they are His servants. Bible scholar William Hendriksen taught this. He stated: "...the number of the beast is the number of MAN."(3) The number 666 is symbolical of man who was created on the sixth day and is imperfect. The number seven in the Bible often (especially in prophecy) is symbolical of completeness. Therefore, 666 is man incomplete but self-righteous.
(3) More Than Conquerors, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1939,1967, p.182.
1. The number 666 is not meant to be a personal, physical mark which, if taken, condemns the bearer to eternal damnation, and the bar code of modern commerce is not the mark of the beast. The "mark" is rather a commitment of the soul to the beast system which belongs to Satan.
2. The "70th week" of Daniel 9:24-27 has been fulfilled and will not become the seven years long so-called "great tribulation". Therefore, there will be no rapture until the second advent of Christ at which time judgment of the world's people will occur.
3. Today's "Israel" is not a reestablishment of ancient Israel. Today's "Israel" is composed of Talmudists and Zionists whose religion (or lack of) is not to be equated with the one given by God to Moses.
4. The idea of a ten nation European confederacy is rooted in the dream image seen by King Nebuchadnezzar of ancient Babylon and interpreted by Daniel (Dan. 2:31-45). The image had legs of iron that scholars believe represented the powerful Roman Empire. From this point the dispensationalists assume that the image had TEN toes(4) so they conjecture that the toes represent ten European nations of the future which they designate as a "revived Roman Empire." This is unwarranted, for the goal of the whole passage in Daniel is to predict the establishment of an eternal kingdom while the image was standing. It is clear that this kingdom was established by the first advent of Christ. A "revived Roman Empire" is mere conjecture on the part of dispensationalists, and Relfe is one of them.
(4) The Bible refers to the toes of the image, but doesn't mention TEN because the number is irrelevant to the prophecy.
There is strong evidence that we are living in the last days and that the New World Order may be the last "kingdom" to rule over us. But God in His mercy has provided a way of salvation for those who will believe and submit to Him. They are given a new name "in their foreheads" and no physical mark forced by government can take that away. Praise God! Amen.
(5) An adjunct of the 700 Club.
The booklet is concerned with the heavy attacks being made upon religion in America, especially Christianity, and documents some of the court cases. As Smyrna has published before, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and People for the American Way are heavily involved in Christian bashing.
For example, the ACLU claims that the religious right is working to destroy our civil !iberties.(6) Nothing could be further from the truth. And People for the American Way (a euphemism designed to fool the public) Action Fund advertises itself as "'Your Voice Against Intolerance.'"(7) Often, these leftist organizations accuse their opposition of that which they are guilty. They seem conscienceless and too frequently distort the truth mercilessly.
(6) Page 10.
(7) Ibid.
Mr. Fournier's booklet states on page 10: "Sometimes religious cleansers reveal their hostility through pejorative language. Fundamentalist, extremist, backwards, medieval, neanderthal-like, fanatical.. these are just a few of the terms meant to smear religious people. And language like this is used many times to instill fear in others."
In two cases cited by Fournier, school children were told that they could not read their Bibles during silent reading time in public school classrooms. In the first case a "tattletale" student "snitched" on Jason Bishop who was reading the Bible during free time. The teacher told him to put it away because it was illegal to read it in school.
Fournier relates the case of the New York abortionist who botched his job by failing to kill an unborn baby whose arm was severed in the process. And herein lies the insanity of the culture espoused by leftists. This abortionist was prosecuted for not succeeding in a proper procedure of infanticide. He was berated by the media, not because he attempted to murder the infant, but because he failed! Fournier shows proper righteous indignation: "...but that same public would have apparently not reacted at all had the child been killed."
These things in America ". . .can only happen when the cancer of irrationalism begins permeating a culture, and that usually happens when a culture is being cleansed of any sense of absolutes that transcend yet apply to the human order. It's those fixed norms of right and wrong and truth and error that are almost always supplied by religion. ..Rather than breeding intolerance, a belief in absolute values has inspired compassion, cultivated heroic virtue, and given rise to nations such as the United States."(8)
(8) Fournier, p.15.
Notwithstanding the excellent message contained in the above booklet published by the ACLJ, it is sad that Mr. Foumier felt it necessary to include some material that is historically incorrect and he also used a term that is self-contradictory. In a section titled SHADOWS FROM THE PAST, he told of how religious cleansing could arise in a democratic, pluralistic society, and stated: "Perhaps the best way to get a handle on this is to look at what led to the Holocaust" and referred to "...the extermination of six million Jews in Nazi Germany... This figure has long since been abandoned by responsible scholars, and his reference to Hitler and the National Socialists as "dedicated to genocide" in pursuing "extermination policies" sounds as if he has obtained his misinformation from the "telly" as the Britishers would say. When will people stop trusting that tube of mental and emotional abuse in their living rooms?
Fournier also referred to "gassings" of prisoners by the Germans in World War Two. If he was referring to the concentration camps, it is another historical non-sequitur, because it has been scientifically demonstrated that the "gas chambers" were non-existent. Finally, he used the term "Judeo-Christian heritage" as all do who have refused to look or listen to the kindly but urgent advice of others on the matter. What is it that causes those people to close their minds to this subject? Have they listened instead to the voices of mass influence? If so, then they are guilty of moral lapses in their characters.
We would say to those at ACLJ: Keep up your great work of defending the Constitutional rights of Christians, but please do some serious, objective study about the "holocaust" and Talmudic eschatology. We think you'll be amazed!
For example, when Simpson's lawyers moved to dismiss evidence obtained from his home by a search warrant, each little detail was placed under the microscope to ascertain whether the Fourth Amendment was violated by the L.A.P.D. On the other hand, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) in Waco clearly exceeded the parameters of the Fourth Amendment when they obtained a search warrant for the Branch Davidian campus. The private property and domicile of the Weavers in Idaho were grossly violated by Federal Marshalls who murdered the young son and later the FBI whose sharpshooter murdered Mrs. Weaver.
To refresh our readers' memories, here is the Fourth Amendment:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
This supreme law of the land is probably violated fairly often by law enforcement agencies, but our point here is that the media and prominent lawyers across the country have been hypocrites in applying it. Simpson's lawyers have made a mockery of justice in playing to the media and in submitting so many nit-picking motions to the court. They are obviously working every trick they know to get their client off (including de facto jury tampering), regardless of whether or not he committed the double murder.
[After looking at a mass of evidence provided by a former L.A.P.D. and former Chief Investigator for Ventura County BeWISE firmly believes that on the contrary, the Simpson lawyers are actually working on the same team as Clark - the ADL - in efforts to follow the directions of the "Protocols" and stir up tensions between the Blacks and the Whites in this Nation. They are *all* (defense, prosecutors, LAPD, media, etc...) involved in this ADL/Jewish Utopian agenda.]
The whole objective of most lawyers in the present system of jurisprudence is to win their cases, not to see that justice is done. Sadly, many don't seem to know what justice is.
Two of the talk show hosts on TV who have persisted in their coverage of the Simpson case have been Larry King of CNN and Geraldo Rivera of CNBC. They have hosted a gaggle of lawyers, more of whom have been defense attorneys, and they all hash and rehash the pros and cons, legalities and stratagems of the Simpson extravaganza. There is no way that a fair trial can be secured, much less justice. Judge Lance Ito has now expressed his extreme displeasure with the media.
Court TV, the channel that brings us actual court room scenes, was discussing the issue of media coverage recently and a representative of the media was there. Naturally, the latter uttered all the benefits of cameras in court rooms, the best of which was "educational". Smyrna will not argue this, but we are definitely opposed to the unending stream of commentary, for it is the commentators who not only have the last word, but who practice the ultimate in casuistry, thereby misleading most of their audiences. One of the best things to happen to TV has been C-Span because it merely records the action without comment. This has been of tremendous value to the public, for the people can now see and evaluate their representatives in Congress. And what a spectacle it is! As SMYRNA has stated before, TV programming is public enemy number one, and this condemnation is not confined to R-rated movies and culturally depraved sitcoms and standup "comics", but to talk shows and their biased hosts.
(9) Parade magazine, 2/24/91.
King was once "...a Miami radio host with a thriving sideline in swindles.
"In 1971, he was arrested for stealing $5,000 from Miami businessman Lou Wolfson, but served no time in jail because the statute of limitations had run out. He wasn't so lucky, however, on a charge of writing rubber checks when the publicity of his guilty plea got him kicked off the air."(10)
(10) Star Magazine, 12/29/92.
According to the article in Star Magazine, King has scammed several people out of thousands of dollars, including Abner Wolf, whose widow says her husband lost $34,000 to King, and she never wants to hear his voice again.
King's attorney, Bob Woolf, was quoted by Star as saying that his client would like to repay the money he took.(11) SMYRNA would like to ask Larry King if he has made restitution since he is in the big bucks. If not, we think the public should know it. We believe that the people have a right to know the unvarnished back grounds of persons who feed us on TV.
(11) Ibid.
On 10/13/94 King was roasted at a benefit dinner for Spina Bifida victims. He told many humorous stories, among which was this one:
He said he grew up in a neighborhood where only Jews and Italians lived. Every week the Italians beat up on the Jews because the latter had killed their Lord. But someone organized the affair so that the Jews got beaten on Tuesday afternoon at four - that way they could plan for it and not get hit on the head from behind. Finally, someone called a halt to the whole affair. The Jews said, "We give up, we admit we killed your Lord. But we think the statute of limitations has run out!" There was great laughter.
SMYRNA wonders what would happen if someone told a similar story about the "holocaust".
[BeWISE knows what would happen. If it ever did get verbalized on the air, you would be able to hear the "fireworks" from wherever you are sitting! It has been demonstrated over and over freedom of speech only applies to a select few.]
October 1,1994
To: Tom Snyder CNBC, Burbank
From: - - - - - - - [SMYRNA]
Subject: Your remark about "idiots".
Dear Tom:
Your remark while interviewing Gail (what's her name? O'Grady?) about those who "have a right to make idiots of themselves" was in deed unfortunate. Your response was triggered by a caller from Florida who complained about the "Bible thumpers" keeping the NYPD show off of her local channel.
For an interesting conversationalist who ordinarily seems fair minded, your comment was prima facie evidence of prejudice against those whose culture is different from yours. And when, for heaven's sake, will we ever hear the death knell of that cliche' "If you don't like the show there's an off switch on the TV set." Has it never occurred to you that there are children and teenagers who watch culturally destructive programming while not under the supervision of caring adults? Who will preempt their choices? Your hackneyed expression about turning off the TV is representative of the most naive utterance of the vested interest conglomerate euphemistically called "the entertainment industry".
By the way, when was the last time you interviewed a responsible, intelligent, educated "idiot" to whom you referred? Could your answer be additional prima facie evidence of prejudice?
According to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency via the Forward, the newspaper Izvestia libeled Zhirinovsky and had to pay him damages. Smyrna believes that Falwell and Robertson should consider such action against Dershowitz or anyone else who compares them to Nazis.
[This writer sent faxes to Prof. Dershowitz and to the dean of Harvard Law School, to Prof. Michael Paulsen of the U. of MN Law School who also debated on Firing Line, to Prof. Graglia of the U. of TX Law School (another debater), to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, and to the ACLJ.]
The movie Schindler's List won top film industry awards and Steven Spielberg, Jewish filmmaker, was acclaimed the most successful producer of all time. His production is generally believed to be solidly based on historical facts. But is it? Some informed people say "no". Christian News cites WW II historian Alan R. Critchley: "'The book upon which Schindler's List is based is a work of fiction, a novel. It contains assertions which are absolutely untrue.'"(12)
(12) Christian News, 5/2/94 p.2.
Schindler's List was originally published as Schindler's Ark in London by Hodder and Stoughton in 1982 as fiction. The American edition was published under the title of Schindler's List by Simon and Schuster and was listed as fiction.
It is interesting to note that all publishers including Harmondsworth of England, Simon and Schuster, Penguin, Touchstone, et al., have listed Schindler's List as fiction (13) and Touchstone Books placed the following note in some of its copies, apparently its older ones: "This book is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents are either products of the author's imagination or are used fictitiously. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental."(14)
(13) University of California catalog.
(14) Copy in SMYRNA's library.
SMYRNA is perplexed as to why such language would be used in a book that is purportedly based on actual events with actual persons, and why this note was placed in some but not all copies.
The final insult to society is that Spielberg's propaganda film is now required viewing for children in many public schools! Oh! The intolerance of forced "tolerance".
Hopefully the hate laws of Canada are on their way out, but probably on their way in for the U.S. Hate laws are enacted to protect the haters against those who tell the truth about them. Let's look at a typical case at the University of California at Berkeley:
But never let it be said that calm truth resulting from scholarly endeavors is any protection against the attacks, both verbal and physical, of the enemies of free speech who invaded his meeting, threw him on a table, destroyed much of his literature, and injured several in the audience including a 65 year old "Gandhist". Those enemies of free speech in the case of David Irving are Jews and friends who employ all means short of murder to silence him. And they do it in the name of - you guessed it - self defense. Lia Sasha of the Revolutionary Trotskyist League was quoted by the Daily Californian, "We have to be prepared to defend ourselves" against the "fascists" who would "just as much kill us."
The organizations identified as the perpetrators of violence at Irving's meeting were the one just cited plus the International Socialist Organization and the Spartacus Youth Club. Those who know the correct version of history will recognize all three as mere fronts for international Talmudism/Zionism. This doesn't mean that all members are Jews; it simply means that somewhere in the background the string pullers are Talmudists/Zionists. Who else would violently react against the truth about the "holocaust"?
The "intellectualism" of Berkeley's activists resides in their fists, expressed just as Mao tse Tung expressed his: "Power comes from the barrel of a gun."
We need to distribute this booklet far and wide. Contact her at Project '93, P.O. Box 492200, Redding, CA 96049-2200.
(15) Regnery Publishing, Inc., Washington, DC, 1992.
Koon earned more than 100 commendations for his time on the force, including the Department's second-highest award for personal bravery. He has a bachelor's degree and master's degree in criminal justice from California State University in Los Angeles, and a second master's in public administration from U.S.C. He has a wife and five children who have been deprived of his presence at home.
The fly of the dust cover of his book states: "For the first time, the entire story of the Rodney King affair is told in full detail - what happened and why, and the reasons the Simi Valley, California jury found the officers innocent on charges of using excessive force against a felony evader with a lengthening record of violent conduct.
Sgt. Koon was the officer in charge on that fateful night of March 3, 1991 when King was apprehended after nearly eight miles of speeds of more than 100 miles per hour. King, six foot four and 240 lbs. took two separate charges of 50,000 volts each from a stun-gun and continued to try to assault officers. The officers tried everything in the book to subdue him without success. They had every right to believe that he was on PCP, and Koon says that Dr. Mancia at the hospital confirmed that he was. (16)
(16) Ibid
Officer Stacey Koon has been convicted of the violation of Rodney King's civil rights, and many have been led to believe by the media that he is a racist, yet he is the only officer who volunteered to administer mouth-to-mouth resuscitation to a black male prostitute with AIDS. For this kind of moral character he is now serving time in prison. Truly, we live in an upside down, wrong side out world.
By the way, wasn't it George Bush who caused federal charges to be brought against the L.A.P.D. officers? And isn't that unconstitutional, no matter how they rationalized it?
Laurence Powell is the other officer who is the victim of black radicals and liberal politicians.
We are tremendously thankful to all of you who subscribe and contribute over and above. We enjoy hearing from you and appreciate your suggestions.
