The Master Stone

A Screenplay In Progress — SYNOPSIS

DARRELL PENLEY, 35, a conspiracy theorist, researcher, writer and a student of Bible prophecy, is recruited by a secret organization to gather intelligence on the modus operandi of the Illuminati and to prove the existence of a mysterious man, also 35, purported to be an incarnation of Marduk Ra and a “redeemed” Lucifer, whom insiders say is laying the groundwork for the Allied Union, a global confederation of regional states. Aided by a lifelong friend, BUZZ LANCE, 55, a former Naval intelligence specialist, DARRELL simultaneously pursues answers about his own roots and the mysterious death of his father, whose involvement with the Urantia Book and the mysterious death of ex-Secretary of Defense James Vincent Forrestal and JFK are cryptically referenced in newly discovered diaries. In the course of his research, which takes him finally to Antarctica and the underground world of Agarthi, DARRELL realizes that he is destined to confront the man he is researching so that he and BUZZ, secretly in search of the powerful Master Stone, may fulfill their presumed roles as human civilization draws to a close.

THE MASTER STONE — Continuously Being Revised

FADE IN

EXT. A BEACH IN FLORIDA — NIGHT

BUZZ LANCE, 55, is lying on the beach looking up at the stars next to his sister PAM LANCE, 50.

BUZZ
Don’t you ever feel a little embarrassed that you write such elaborate stories which really don’t make any sense?

PAM
I’m selling them, so I must be doing something right.

BUZZ
It’s the pretty pictures people buy your comic books for. You could write the Iliad backwards … and there would be people who would gush.

PAM
Like what in particular of my work do you find so objectionable?

BUZZ
It’s the same problem that I have with a lot of comics. Take Alan Moore and Watchmen …

PAM
Which is a classic which changed how the world views comics. It has a unique symmetry.

BUZZ
Like a horseshoe. I’ve tried to read it. It’s rambling and self-indulgent. It’s not literature as some people would like to call it. It’s very disjointed. Sometimes you can’t tell certain characters apart because they’re drawn so similarly. And the storyline is all over the board.

PAM
And you’re using this description for my stories, too?

BUZZ
The ones I’ve read. Sorry, but … Whatever happened to good storytelling?

PAM
So give me an idea for a story with memorable characters which would convince me that you know what you’re talking about. Something current.

BUZZ
Why has no one done the story of the Antichrist from a biblical perspective? Now there is a conflict and a story which people could sink their teeth into.

PAM
A Bible story? You’re not serious?

BUZZ
Which doesn’t pull any punches. Make it as raunchy as you want.

PAM
Who would be the protagonist? Besides Jesus?

BUZZ
Some bum off the street who becomes a hero. Who is among the first to figure out who the Antichrist really is.

PAM
For the purpose of doing what?

BUZZ
To kick him in the balls. Mock him. Make fun of him. Show him up as a loser, a buffoon.

PAM
I actually like that idea. Where did you come up with that?

BUZZ
I dunno. Darrell’s material.

PAM
He’s a very conflicted individual.

BUZZ
He’s sort of devoted himself to this topic.

PAM
To what? The Antichrist?

BUZZ
Yeah. He’s put it upon himself to reveal who he is. And what the Illuminati might have to do with him.

PAM
Why would the Illuminati have anything to do with the Antichrist?

BUZZ
Are you kidding? They’re up to their ears in satanism, or so we’re told. I mean, if the elite are occult oriented … he would be their man, right?

PAM
But he is defeated in the end, if I’m reading things correctly.

BUZZ
They’re Luciferians. They must not think so. They must have a dim view of Jesus.

PAM
Then, they have a varying view of biblical prophecy.

BUZZ
A distorted one … based on gross misinterpretations of what the book of Revelation says, for instance. That’s my take.

PAM
They actually believe they’re descended from Jesus, some of them, right?

BUZZ
Yeah. Which is nothing you’d boast about if he was a mere man.

PAM
Interesting.

BUZZ
They will perhaps fulfill prophecy by having misinterpreted it, by making Lucifer their messiah.

PAM
Are you convinced that there will be one? Is Darrell?

BUZZ
I can’t imagine that there would be one if everybody is looking for one. I mean … would the Antichrist know that he is the Antichrist? Who would want to admit that he was the Antichrist?

PAM
That would depend on whether the person who was the Antichrist knew what the prophecies were concerning the Antichrist, right? You’re reversing your good idea, you know that don’t you?

BUZZ
I just think it would be a good story. Timely. The ultimate good versus evil conflict. Whether there will actually be such a person, I don’t know. Ask Darrell. He can tell you better than I can.

CUT TO:

DARRELL PENLEY, 35, is riding in his car when his cell phone rings.

PHONE RINGS

He answers it.

DARRELL
Hello?

On the line is GRETA, 37.

V.O.
Hi, Darrell. It’s me. I thought we ought to get together soon. Tonight.

DARRELL
(Preoccupied)
Why did you think that?

V.O.
I had what I think is a confirming dream last night.

DARRELL
Greta, we can’t meet every time you have a dream.

CUT TO:

We see GRETA talking on the phone.

GRETA
But this meant something. Visually it was stunning. And the location, I think, is worthy of your consideration.

CUT TO:

In a flashback we see a giant revolving box hovering in a blue light in a large cave. A face turns toward us … and we see a REPTOID creature.

CUT TO:

We see DARRELL on the phone.

DARRELL
I have some research to do. Can you write it up and email it to me?

CUT TO:

We see GRETA on the phone.

GRETA
Yes. Why do I feel like I’m being stiffed?

CUT TO:

We see DARRELL on the phone.

DARRELL
I have a lot of my mind, Greta. The group I’m working for wants something more concrete from me.

V.O.
I’ll type it up. But call me when you get it. Bye.

DARRELL
Bye.

DARRELL hangs up.

CUT TO:

BUZZ and PAM continue their conversation while walking along the beach.

PAM
Speaking of Darrell … what ever became of the novel the two of you were going to write?

BUZZ
It was progressing, I thought, until he went off on this new tangent.

PAM
I thought your idea had merit. Camelot In Ruins, right?

BUZZ
How the sixties have bled into all of the decades which have followed THEM. I think the project only exacerbated his interest in eschatology. He became even more obsessed with secret societies.

PAM
So, tie that into the novel.

BUZZ
He got this gig.

PAM
Doing what?

BUZZ
Working for some online rag. Plus, he wouldn’t leave the questions alone about his father.

PAM
Who was murdered?

BUZZ
Yeah.

PAM
Tie that in, too. Mark Twain said to write what you know, what’s in your sphere of experience.

CUT TO:

In a flashback we see DEXTER PENLEY, 42, walking hand in hand along an ocean boardwalk with a young DARRELL, 5, and his sister MARY, 7. Both children are holding balloons. BUZZ appears in the crowd, walking several paces behind them.

DEXTER suddenly looks behind, to his left and right, and sees two men approaching him. He throws his hand into the air and makes a fist.

BUZZ, at 25, swoops up the two children and begins to run with them, as DEXTER hustles away through the crowd.

BUZZ
I’m Buzz. And I’m a friend of your father. You’re safe with me.

CUT TO:

We see DEXTER lying face down in the sand and surf, surrounded by police.

CUT TO:

BUZZ and PAM continue their conversation, walking up steps leading to a luxury hotel.

BUZZ
Maybe you’d like to collaborate? On a graphic novel. With me as the protagonist.

PAM
Ha. A spy thriller?

BUZZ
Yeah. Only all the spies are superheroes.

PAM
Plot it out. I’ll take a look at anything you come up with.

BUZZ
Really?

PAM
What are successful sisters for?

CUT TO:

INT. DARRELL PENLEY’S BEDROOM — NIGHT

In a darkened bedroom, we see bookshelves lining the walls filled with books about secret societies and Bible topics. We pan around the room until we come to a small table on which sits a Bible open to the book of Daniel. The pages are illuminated by the moon. The wind through the window turns the pages from Daniel to the book of Revelation.

Panning further around the room, we see DARRELL and his wife MEREDITH, 34, asleep in bed. Suddenly, DARRELL sits up straight in bed, his eyes wide open.

DARRELL
That’s it! I understand now.

MEREDITH stirs.

MEREDITH
Understand what?

DARRELL
Who the Illuminati think they are. Collectively.

MEREDITH
We shouldn’t have eaten all that chocolate. I can’t sleep either.

DARRELL
No. Don’t you see? They understand prophecy as well as I do, only their interpretation is skewed.

MEREDITH sits up.

MEREDITH
Try to go back to sleep, Darrell. I have to get up early.

DARRELL
I don’t think I can. I’ve figured out how the Tribulation and its judgments are supposed to play out.

MEREDITH
I know you’re working on an assignment, Darrell. But you have to find a way to give this stuff a rest. It’s controlling your life.

DARRELL
They think they’re God. That all the gods collectively are God. And the Illuminati believe it is their responsibility to make the book of Revelation come true. The bowl and woe judgments … will be brought upon the earth by the enlightened ones.

MEREDITH
Okay. Go back to sleep.

DARRELL
God is a creator … not a destroyer. If the world population is supposed to be decreased by two-thirds, as Revelation says … they will be the ones to make it come to pass.

MEREDITH
Goodnight.

DARRELL
I’ve figured out their M.O. They do need to be stopped. But how?

We see the Bible on the table in the moonlight. Panning up we see the full moon outside DARRELL’s bedroom window.

CUT TO:

INT. A GRAND LODGE IN THE WOODS — SAME

We see the full moon as it shines over a lake and a luxurious lodge.

Two ageless mysterious figures, CARLOS and MAX, glowing but invisible, are observing a meeting of men seated around a table.

CARLOS
They persist on referring to God as the Demiurge.

MAX
Are you surprised?

CARLOS
Surely one of these people has encountered grace.

MAX
They’ve succeeded by graft and greed through the course of their lives and have had no need of grace. They’ve broken the rules to get where they are. They’re reliant only upon one another. And so blessings to them are not from God but spoils achieved at their own hands.

CARLOS
And that prompts them to see God as both good and evil?

MAX
Or not to regard him at all. Those who allow for God believe that God kills the humble, the stupid, the poor, starves them, punishes them for being lazy, for having no guile. And, so, they have a twisted perception of death and judgment. When such people die at their hands … they believe they’re doing God’s work to rid the world of undesirables. And yet they’re very moralistic in extreme, contradictory ways. They don’t believe that the poor deserve to fall in love and have sex which can result in one more useless eater.

CARLOS
They seem to be obsessed with death.

MAX
It is a mystery they can’t fathom, so they mock it. And they recklessly use it as a means to an end.

CARLOS
Why don’t they fear it?

MAX
Desperation isn’t part of their experiences or common emotions. It’s foreign to them. They’ve never exercised that part of their conscious selves. Their brains are not programmed for it. When an obstacle presents itself … they solicit help from one of the brothers and dance on. Plus they can afford to put death off … but there are other avenues open to them, and that’s why we came here to listen in.

CARLOS
What? Why?

MAX
They’ve been seduced, some of them, into believing that they can have eternal life, both physical and spiritual.

CARLOS
Though they’ve violated all of the standards which qualify them to live eternally?

MAX
Not according to those who have seduced them. They’ve appealed to their pride, their unabated pride.

CARLOS
I don’t understand.

MAX
There are other realms, solely occupied by proud spirits. Even they have been seduced. They’ve operated freely … and they assume such will always be the case. And they’ve promised to those whom they’ve seduced … the same light which now they possess … but which will be extinguished.

CARLOS
I continue to hear that … but that light has not subsided. Look at them … they’re laughing even as they plot the death of two-thirds of the world’s people … even as they plan to destroy the earth.

MAX
Do you note the spirits around them, facilitating them?

CARLOS
No.

MAX
Let me open your eyes.

CUT TO:

INT. A GRAND BALLROOM — SAME

A gathering of men in tuxedos and Masonic regalia draw closer to a large winding staircase in a dimly lit ballroom.

In close-up, we see a golden mask in shadow. Out of the shadows steps a man SUPREMUS DAVID ROCKEFELLER, 35, wearing the golden mask and a red cloak, with a hood and cape. He begins to descend the staircase.

CHARLES, 45, at the base of the staircase, lifts a glass of champagne and speaks in reverent tones.

CHARLES
The Priesthood of Amen is assembled. We beckon you, lord. We welcome you. Join us in your incarnate form from a thousand years hence.

The gathering applauds softly as the man in the mask descends.

CUT TO:

INT. A BEDROOM — SAME

From the perspective of a fluid camera, in and out of focus, we see MICHEL PRESTON, 33, in a tuxedo, reflected in a full-length mirror, holding a ring with a large black stone to his forehead. He raises his other hand, palm in, before him in an occult gesture. REX, 25, is holding the camera.

MICHEL
You were in Eden, the garden of God, and every stone adorned you. You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were blameless in your ways from the day you were created till wickedness was found in you. Through your widespread trade you were filled with violence, and you sinned. You walked among the fiery stones …

SUPREMUS, holding his golden mask in his hand, opens the bedroom door, throws back his red cape and steps in.

SUPREMUS
Are you referring to me?

MICHEL
Supremus! No.

SUPREMUS
Why are you wearing my ring, Michel?

MICHEL
Am I? I am, yes. To honor you.

SUPREMUS
You might have honored me with your presence at the party. Who is this?

MICHEL
Rex.

REX
Yes.

SUPREMUS
Rex? … There can only be one. And I am he.

DISSOLVE TO:

EXT. OUTSIDE DARRELL PENLEY’S HOME — DAY

A black 1947 Buick pulls up in front of DARRELL’s home … and two MEN IN BLACK get out. They walk up to the front porch and ring the doorbell. DARRELL comes to the door.

MAN IN BLACK
Mr. Penley?

DARRELL
Yes?

MAN IN BLACK
Hi. We, my partner and I, are with a … secret organization.

DARRELL
The Mormons?

MAN IN BLACK
No.

DARRELL
Jehovah’s Witnesses? Because we’ve already reported …

MAN IN BLACK
No, we don’t have a name. Per se. And we have orders to bring you in for questioning. Regarding your work.

DARRELL
And if I refuse?

MAN IN BLACK
Then there will be heck to pay, because we’ll all be working against the team’s objective, its universal mission, its raison d’etre.

DARRELL
Which is what?

MAN IN BLACK
Well, working as a team.

DARRELL
Let me get my coat.

CUT TO:

After a long walk down a darkened corridor, DARRELL and the two MEN IN BLACK reach a door, which one of the men unlocks by punching in a code on a key pad, allowing DARRELL to go inside. The apparently spacious office is completely dark except for the light on a desk, where JAMES CROWLEY, 65, sits, and a spotlit chair some distance from the desk.

CROWLEY
Have a seat, Darrell.

DARRELL sits down in the spotlit chair.

DARRELL
Here? (Nervously) Thank you.

CROWLEY
First of all, Darrell, let me say what a thrill it is to find a researcher and writer of your caliber with so much enthusiasm and paranoia regarding the future of your nation and your planet.

DARRELL
Well … thank you. So, I’m not in any trouble?

CROWLEY
No, no. Our men in black only seem menacing.

DARRELL
So, you haven’t brought me here to torture or kill me?

CROWLEY
Heavens, no. We want to encourage you. Exploit you … explore with you some common objectives.

DARRELL
Working as a team?

CROWLEY
Precisely right. I love writers. You’re so perceptive.

DARRELL
To do what?

CROWLEY
To surveil the surveillers. Is that a word? Infiltrate the infiltrators.

DARRELL
Which ones?

CROWLEY
Well, we’re having a hard time narrowing down the list. There are so many.

DARRELL
Other secret societies?

CROWLEY
Right again.

DARRELL
Well, who’s on your list?

CROWLEY
Well, take your pick, right? The Great White Brotherhood, the Cult of the Serpent, the Brotherhood of Venus, Nagas, the Cult of Kali, the Druids, the Knights Templar, the Freemasons, Rosicrucians, Knights of Malta, the Los Alumbrados, the Skull and Bones Society, the Bohemian Grove, the Order of the Golden Dawn, the Bilderbergs, the Council on Foreign Relations, the United Nations, the Trilateral Commission, the FBI, the CIA, M15, Mossad, the KKK, Shriners, the Tree of Life Kabbalah Boys Klezmer Band and Guild.

DARRELL
That’s a new one.

CROWLEY
Tragic. The Knights of Columbus, Hollywood, the Corporate Dictatorship, Opus Dei, the Jesuits, the Catholic Church, the Lords of the Black Stone, the Lords of the Master Stone, the Priesthood of Amen, the Thule Society, the Theosophical Society, the Three-Hundred, the Club of Rome, the Club of One-Thousand and One, the Vril Society, the Nephilim and, of course, the Anunnaki, not to mention the New Age Daughters of the American Revolution and the Walker County Lions Club.

DARRELL
What about the Ordo Templi Orientis?

CROWLEY
How could I have left them out? And to show our appreciation, our organization met recently in our board room bunker and voted to present you with this plaque of commendation for your billboard campaign, and …

DARRELL
Thank you. Yes?

CROWLEY
Of course your online writings. Especially your hypothesis about the judgments listed in the book of Revelation.

DARRELL
Yes, I’m rather proud of that. Although I can’t take full credit. It hit me while I was having a very vivid dream.

CROWLEY
So you’re a visionary?

DARRELL
In my dream the Illuminati had stormed the island of Patmos … where the former Soviet Union had built missile launchers with nuclear warheads.

CROWLEY
Patmos is where Saint John wrote the book of Revelation.

DARRELL
And now more than ever … I think it’s important that we identify who this mysterious man named John was, because that never has been resolutely determined by scholars.

CROWLEY
Why do we need to know about John?

DARRELL
Well, if John wrote Revelation on behalf of Jesus and God the Father, then the Illuminati could not be the God who is to bring these judgments upon the earth, though they might think that they are.

CROWLEY
Interesting.

DARRELL
However, God may allow these evil men to perform the destruction of the earth, which will only bite them in the ass. Asses.

CROWLEY
Well, we’ll kick that around. But let’s get down to business.

DARRELL
All right.

CROWLEY
The president is clearly not the AC. He’s a socialist, but he’s not the foretold son of perdition, at least not until he can do signs and wonders as well as he shoots a basketball.

DARRELL
I would agree with that.

CROWLEY
The jury, of course, is still out, as it must always be, but for now … he ain’t him. But we very much believe there is one. I mean, how could there not be? We’re headed for a one-world government, ten horns with little crowns, as Revelation has told us we would be … so we’re betting that the whole sordid mess is going to play itself out, with one lame brain calling the shots. We need for someone to nail the identity of this sucker down.

DARRELL
And what do you want me to do?

CROWLEY
In a word … go to Antarctica. To relieve our correspondent.

DARRELL
For what reason?

CROWLEY
Just to snoop around. And then file a report on whether the earth is really hollow with caves inhabited by either the Vril-Ya, giant amazon women, Aryans or highly evolved reptilian races. Our present correspondent has turned out to be more skittish than we were originally led to believe.

DARRELL
Antarctica. Why Antarctica?

CROWLEY
Well, Darrell, you should know that … that’s where all the action is. If there is to be an AC, we don’t use the “A” word, then he’s probably freezing his butt off up there putting his evil minions through their paces.

DARRELL
Would you want me to go alone?

CROWLEY
No, you can take a guest.

DARRELL
Weapons?

CROWLEY
We’d prefer not. Just a pen … or pens. Unless you can get the Internet up there to file your reports. Will you consider it?

DARRELL
Well, sure, I’ll consider …

CROWLEY
Good. I have your plane tickets and your itinerary right here.

DARRELL
You indicated that you wanted to identify the AC?

CROWLEY
Yes. That would also be part of your mission. And, to that end, we have some new faces emerging among the ranks of the occult elite whose names you might recognize.

DARRELL
Jay-Z?

CROWLEY
Who?

DARRELL
Occult hip hopper.

CROWLEY
No, but I’m not surprised. I hate even to mention this one name it upsets me so much.

DARRELL
Lady Ga Ga.

CROWLEY
No. Who?

DARRELL
She’s a Madonna wanna-be who drenches herself in blood onstage. I think she’s banging all the elite. Like a twenty-first century Marilyn Monroe.

CROWLEY
Madonna? Does she wear one of those metal viking bras with the pointy tips?

DARRELL
No, you’re thinking of Beyonce. Beyonce?

CROWLEY
Well, our board doesn’t know any of these people. No, this new false messiah may be the real one. His name is Rockefeller.

DARRELL
Which one? There are so many.

CROWLEY
He actually isn’t really a biological Rockefeller; he was adopted by them.

DARRELL
Not Bill Clinton?

CROWLEY
No, he’s Bush’s bitch.

DARRELL
Right. That’s a marriage made in hell.

CROWLEY
Don’t get me started. No, this man is named Supreme David.

DARRELL
I think I ordered that once in a Jewish pizzeria.

CROWLEY
Anyway, we’d also like to hire you to research this man and file a report. Flush him out.

DARRELL
That could dangerous.

CROWLEY
Not if he doesn’t exist.

DARRELL
What do you mean?

CROWLEY
Well, unlike Maitreya …

DARRELL
Whatever happened to him?

CROWLEY
Right. Scratch him. Unlike Sun Myung Moon or David Ickes, this man is visibly keeping a low profile. If he exists at all. Will you take the job? Please say yes. The future of civilization hangs precariously in the balance.

DARRELL
Bagging a Rockefeller would be a real feather in my cap …

CROWLEY
So you’ll do it?

DARRELL
If he doesn’t exist, and if he isn’t the one if he does exist, will I still get paid?

CROWLEY
Well, if he is the one, and if he doesn’t kill you, we’ll double your pay.

DARRELL
Done. Can my guest be a bodyguard?

CROWLEY
I believe our board would approve that.

DARRELL
I know just the man.

CUT TO:

INT. BUZZ LANCE’S GARAGE — DAY

DARRELL drives into the auto repair garage of BUZZ, at 55. DARRELL gets out of his car, approaches BUZZ, who is wiping grease from his hands, and tries to hand BUZZ a folder.

DARRELL
Here, Buzz, read this dossier. I may have a job for you.

BUZZ holds up his hands to show they’re covered with grease.

BUZZ
Just tell me what it says. I’ll read it later.

DARRELL
You’ll need to read it in context. It’s complicated material.

BUZZ
Give me the high points. And tell me what the objective is.

DARRELL
The objective is to keep me from getting killed while I’m doing the research to find out if Agartha and this man exist.

BUZZ
Cinch. High points. Hit me.

DARRELL
Well, our boy is reported to have a high-tech chest implant, and he ingests a white powder, which is comprised of gold, platinum and sixty-eight other trace elements in their monatomic state.

BUZZ
So, he’s a health food nut?

DARRELL
The powder also contains sea bed deposits.

BUZZ
Who was a catfish in a previous life.

DARRELL
The other two supplements he takes are a pure white gold powder, sometimes referred to as the Philosopher’s Stone, and the other one is a white gooey liquid that is pure platinum.

BUZZ
And he does this because his last name is either Descartes or Cartier?

DARRELL
Rockefeller. Pay attention. All of this combined keeps him electrically charged, boosting his brain to full capacity. One-hundred percent.

BUZZ
So, we need to carry a six-pack of Leyden jars? Or a lightning rod?

DARRELL
And he has the Superman logo, you know, the big “S,” tattooed on his chest and his back.

BUZZ
Why not an “A”?

DARRELL
Because, his first name begins with an “S.”

BUZZ
Okay, you win. I’ll read it, if you’re not going to give it to me straight.

DARRELL
No, all of this is true, well, according to this material. I’m not kidding around here, Buzz.

BUZZ
But he sounds like a comic book character.

DARRELL
The likes of which … with which you’ve always wanted to tangle, right?

BUZZ
One-hundred percent capacity? I’m lucky to get twenty percent on a good day.

DARRELL
But he has weaknesses.

BUZZ
I would imagine he spends a lot of time on the toilet prospecting.

DARRELL
He’s a womanizer. And a big drinker, only alcohol doesn’t phase him. He can drink a fifth of vodka without batting an eye.

BUZZ
Sea bed deposits and alcohol could not mix, I would strongly imagine. I thought he wasn’t supposed to like women.

DARRELL
Yeah, I thought that, too. So, this may not be the guy.

BUZZ
And so … Bozo the Clown gathered this intel? Where’s he live?

DARRELL
He used to live in Tennessee.

BUZZ
An electric hillbilly?

DARRELL
But now they’re thinking Antarctica. He’s rich. Educated in England.

BUZZ
That makes more sense. Well, okay, count me in. Sounds like I’m going to be paid for chasin’ a ghost.

DARRELL
A ghost?

BUZZ
Someone who doesn’t exist.

DARRELL
Yeah, well, maybe not. He was born without a biological father. His mother became pregnant with him in Roswell, New Mexico after five aliens crashed near there.

BUZZ
Is … that a fact? She was raped by those little gray dudes with no genitals? Now you’ve crossed the line, you know, Darrell?

DARRELL
I have that it was an immaculate conception. And that he has reptilian blood. Did I say he was born in Roswell … in 1974, the same year I was born. You act as if you knew that.

BUZZ
Roswell? No.

DARRELL
The year I was born? You used to live in Albuquerque, right?

BUZZ
Near there. Well, okey dokey, Sherlock. I gotta get back to work.

DARRELL
Are you in?

BUZZ
A virgin-born snake boy who craps precious metals? I’m wavering now.

DARRELL
Why?

BUZZ
I’ve been all tuned up for a guy who looked like Vincent Price wearin’ a cape. Possessed by Apollyon or Abaddon from the abyss. This guy sounds like he crawled out from under a rock.

DARRELL
He believes he’s an incarnation of Marduk Ra, the Egyptian sun god, and a redeemed version of Lucifer.

BUZZ
Well, that’s a little better.

DARRELL
He’s torn apparently between doing good and evil.

BUZZ
I’m takin’ bets on which side he comes down on. Well, then hell, I’m gonna need a costume.

DARRELL
A costume, why?

BUZZ
‘Cause. And I’m gonna need a new name. Better than Buzz Saw. How ‘bout The Prospector?

DARRELL
Buzz, this is serious. The fate of humanity hangs in the balance.

BUZZ
So what if in the course of your research you actually confront this guy? Or we do? Do we offer nothing of resistance? No strength to match his? Or lay down?

DARRELL
We’ll improvise.

BUZZ
Weapons?

DARRELL
Pens only. We don’t want to fight him. We just want to know if he exists.

BUZZ
Tellin’ him we’re just a couple of reporters from Freemasonry Today?

DARRELL
Possibly. I hadn’t thought of that. And … there’s one possible other objective. It will depend on what we find when we get to Antarctica.

BUZZ
What is it?

DARRELL
We won’t know until we break the seal on the football we’ll be carrying.

BUZZ
How will we know when to break the seal?

DARRELL
If we find something called the Tesseract.

CUT TO:

INT. AN UNDERGROUND BUNKER IN TENNESSEE — SAME

SUPREMUS and MICHEL are speaking in an underground bunker surrounded by banks of equipment with blinking lights and radar screens. MICHEL is pacing, deep in thought.

SUPREMUS
What has you so agitated, Michel?

MICHEL
I sense … dissatisfaction with your lordship.

SUPREMUS
What people think of me now is irrelevant.

MICHEL
There are competitors.

SUPREMUS
And they will be revealed for what they are — impostors and frauds.

MICHEL
When? How?

SUPREMUS
When I have become the capstone, the destroying stone which puts all states under my command.

MICHEL
You’re referring to the ten toes … of iron and clay?

SUPREMUS
Yes. Having the Master Stone gives me an advantage none of the impostors have. Have you finished filling out your grid?

MICHEL
I need for you to review it, to see if I have made any mistakes. The symbolism is abstruse. I can’t make out the players, the actors and who will be doing what.

SUPREMUS
When you’re finished I’ll review it. You understand the woe and bowl judgments, correct? The seven seals?

MICHEL
I have them identified and listed in the grid, yes. Who will be the angels who will deliver these judgments?

SUPREMUS
Those whom I will summon.

MICHEL
To what extent will the ten horns have a say in how these judgments are carried out?

SUPREMUS
They’ll be observers like everyone else. They’ll watch as I advance the destruction, bringing them ultimately to their knees. So that when the new heavens and the new earth are created … there will be no other choice for the one to rule but me. Only I know the plan as to how all of this is to play out … as well as you, if you’re diligent in your study.

MICHEL
I’ll have the grid for you to review shortly. Perhaps tomorrow.

SUPREMUS
Good. Your role in the destruction is essential. I cannot do it, Michel, by myself. There are two beasts.

MICHEL
I’ll be ready to play my part. Already I sense my acquisition of power.

SUPREMUS
We have no competitors, Michel. That will be proved. Have you gotten rid of Rex?

MICHEL
He has been dispatched.

SUPREMUS
Banished? Never to return?

MICHEL
Yes, your lordship.

SUPREMUS
You’ll thank me one day that I’ve rid you of all your distractions.

CUT TO:

DARRELL and BUZZ continue their conversation.

BUZZ
There’s something about this little expedition that you’re not telling me.

DARRELL
No there isn’t. I’m every bit as much in the dark as you are. If not more so. There are things you’re not telling me.

BUZZ
I don’t like the plan, which amounts to following a guide to the North Pole to look for some mythical place and a passage to other dimensions. How many are there?

DARRELL
Densities. We don’t know. Four maybe. I don’t know if we will ever fully know.

BUZZ
And how do we gain access, if there is some way in at all?

DARRELL
Salim is on it. He has a way.

BUZZ
And these keys. What are they?

DARRELL
I don’t know. Salim knows.

BUZZ
That’s not good enough. I’m bringing hardware.

DARRELL
Suit yourself.

BUZZ
I have my own keys.

… to be continued

On Conspiracy Paranoia

Who Has Been In Control, Who Is … and Who Will Be?

In the discussion over the so-called New World Order and how best to define it, the roles of Israel, the Jews and Zionism (not to mention Jesus as being the originator of dynastic bloodlines in Europe) frequently come up. We’d like to comment generally about this strange topic which won’t go away online, though we are not Jewish. However, we have studied the Bible, both the Hebrew scriptures (Tanakh) as well as the New Testament, being ourselves Christians. We have worshiped with Jewish people in a temple setting. We have studied Hebrew. We have contemplated converting to Judaism without renouncing our belief in Jesus as the Messiah. However, we have not read in any intensive way the Talmud and other rabbinic materials which are valued by some Jewish people. All we know about Zionism or care to know is that “Zion” is a word used by the prophets to designate the Land of Israel and Jerusalem. We recognize that the word Zionism means different things to different people: for instance, there are very orthodox, Zionist Jews who view non-Jews as anathema or untouchables; and there are people who consider themselves Christian Zionists, which may be a gross contradiction in terms for many Jews who consider themselves Zionists, even as it is a term which offends some Christians. Our view is that anybody has a right to call himself anything he or she wishes and live in peace.

As for us, with all the crazy things we digest online to better inform (or distract) you as a reader of this drivel, being fascinated by human madness, individual and collective, we don’t know what the hell to think. So buy your ticket and take your chances. 

The question has frequently come up in discussions about the New World Order or a one-world government which addresses the degree to which Zionist Jews are at the heart of such an elitist effort, which presumably will consolidate all of the nations of the world under one central governing body. There are some people who believe that Zionist Jews presently control the media and the entertainment industry and the financial centers of the world commerce. All of these things may be true, wholly or in part. Who knows (or may care)? But our view is that if this is the place that Zionists presently occupy, it is a temporary arrangement which won’t last. Whatever the present or future status of world governance may be, whether elite Jews or non-Jews are in control or will be, we believe that any and all governments on earth will give way to a messianic kingdom for believers as it is described in the prophets, Psalms and Daniel, by Jesus, and by John, the writer of the book of Revelation. Jesus wins. Yea!

We define a believer as someone who subscribes to the view — now or later — that the God of Israel has a plan of redemption and restoration for the people of Israel and the world, the living and the dead, which will include a final resurrection with rewards to follow. (What do you really care?)

But our purpose for writing this piece is not to argue the rightness of our personal beliefs which no doubt contrast with those of a lot of people, but to offer clarification and a response to questions which have been raised by some commentators online about presumed occult foundations of Israel and therefore her occult destiny. We define the word “occultism” as the study of divination, sorcery and communicating with spirits of the dead for the purpose of practicing these things to gain advantages — which are opposed by God as stipulated by the Mosaic Law as it is presented in the Torah, specifically in Deuteronomy and Leviticus. We believe that Christians as well as Jews are bound by relevant laws or commandments in the Torah which are reasonably applied in our present society. Jesus lived and encouraged others to live in accordance with the covenant laws expressed relevantly in the Torah, adding that to love one’s neighbor as oneself, freely forgiving others who have wronged us, was to love and please God. (You’ve no doubt heard it all before.)

What has prompted us to write this piece are a series of questions which were recently put to a commentator, researcher and writer who is fairly well known online and very prolific as pertains to the so-called New World Order and the global and/or occult elite as they may operate to control the world behind the scenes. His views are “illuminating” but extreme to a fault in many cases, it seems to us. So we take all of his views with a grain of salt. However, we do not doubt that there are wealthy and powerful elitists with global objectives; nor do we doubt that there are subhuman beings, perhaps inhabited by demonic spirits (perhaps in all cases), which possess high levels of intelligence. We believe these beings will all ultimately be destroyed by God — at least that is our hope.

The questions put to Wes Penre by a man who identifies himself as MAD and his answers are as follows. Our running commentary is provided in italics.

MAD: I am of the belief as well that the war we are fighting, is, and must be won, is one of a spiritual nature. So many people are unaware of their own spiritual potentials and capabilities, let alone that they are engaged in a metaphysical battle for their very souls, and the future of the planet. And this spiritual battle does indeed take place on multiple levels of consciousness and awareness. Due to constant manipulation and deceit, it’s been fairly easy for the Illuminati to suppress and control our spiritual development over the past millenniums through restrictive dogma and tactics of oppression.

Awareness comes from personal experience and our subtle, spontaneous human interconnectedness, emotions, and relationships; not from the obsessive compulsive rituals held within prison-like confines of death-worshiping churches, or at the seat of a sacrificial altar. You are correct too in the fact that mainstream and alternative religions can potentially teach people positive life lessons, though it’s more commonly used not only as a crutch for the psychologically dependent, but also as a way to set faction against faction, and keep us divided in our differences instead of united in our commonalities.

Another subject of which we have many agreements, and that you touched upon in your comments regarding Scientology, is the near total control of not only the mass media and corporate run news-stations, but over Hollywood and the entertainment industry as well. In particular, you’ve done a lot of extremely interesting research into the psyops (propaganda) tactics and “satanic” symbolism behind rock ‘n’ roll.

Rap and hip-hop are starting to come under this same scrutiny as well, as more and more entertainers become involved with Freemasonry and incorporate “Illuminati” style subject matter in their lyrics and artwork. I don’t know if I believe that all of these people are CIA mind-control slaves, but I wouldn’t debate the fact that many of them are controlled assets of the military-industrial-complex, and social engineering institutions such as Tavistock.

Most of these entertainers are probably unaware of the plot, and just perform the music they are given, and take the roles their agents sign them up for, not realizing that they are being used for a major corporate takeover connected to the agendas of the government and military.

I also wouldn’t question the fact that some of these well known entertainers actually ARE involved in MK-ULTRA or PROJECT MONARCH like programming, beginning at a very early age and perhaps running through multiple generations of celebrity families in Hollywood. Could you go into a little detail on this subject, and how deep do you think the rabbit hole goes regarding the entertainment industry and Hollywood propaganda techniques?

WES: I have a certain section of my website specifically dedicated to music, art and entertainment: (http://www.illuminati-news.com/art-and-mc/index2.htm). I noticed early on that the one part of the Illuminati Agenda that people have the hardest time believing is that the music industry is manipulated and controlled by the Illuminati. Before I go into details, I just want to throw out some food for thought: If we agree that this world is to a great extent controlled by the Brotherhood (which these days is quite easy to prove), why on Earth would it be so hard to realize that the music industry and Hollywood are controlled, too? After all, if I were a top Illuminist, one of the first places I would look into and try to control and manipulate would be the music and film industries. Why? Because from there I can reach the whole world at once with my propaganda! Whatever your message is, if you own the media, the music industry and the film industry, you have the PERFECT propaganda machine! Don’t think for a second that the Illuminati didn’t think about that. They are not that stupid. Even L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of the Church of Scientology, had the same idea. If Scientology could recruit enough celebrities, the church would BOOM. So he and his successors did exactly that, and the churched BOOMED!

This subject is so hot that many researchers don’t even want to touch it, it seems like. Not even the well known researchers, such as David Icke and Alex Jones have touched the subject of rock music and mind-control in Hollywood. Very strange, I must say, because it is such an important part of the Illuminati agenda. Perhaps, they don’t want to look in that direction because they like the music and therefore have a blind spot to the subject. I don’t know. I have tried to alert them on this problem, and although I usually get communication back, I never got any replies to my emails about rock music.

Anyway, here is the thing, and here is the myth: Rock ‘n’ roll is rebellious and a weapon against corruption and greed; with rock ’n’ roll we can change the world. Now, here is the reality: Rock music was an Illuminati experiment from the beginning to the end, to see how easy it would be to manipulate, degrade and drug down the masses. Illuminati puppets like the CIA sponsored Aldous Huxley, Timothy Leary and others started promoting LSD, while other government plants, including the rock stars themselves, promoted other kinds of drugs as well. From there we had the hippie movement. All those young, good-hearted people let their hair grow, thinking they could change the world with drugs, peace demonstrations and rock/pop music. Instead, people became more and more introverted and apathetic as time went on. Many got stuck in drugs and quite a few died from it — including the rock stars themselves.

(Of what ultimate benefit to a commerce-driven elite is a world not of productive young people and adults, which oils the world economy, but of drugged-out, apathetic people? People took and take drugs because they wish to escape from the boredom of the everyday life these two men say the elitists somehow control. Rock ‘n‘ roll has been spontaneous, and in most cases rebellious against the very establishment these two men say are running the show. — rcg)

Dr. John Coleman wrote an excellent book called “The Committee of 300”, about the Tavistock Center and how they, within that facility and behind locked doors, did advanced mind control experiments on people. According to Coleman and other researchers as well, it was here the Beatles and the Rolling Stones were “created.” (Reading the histories of both bands and their slow and gradual seminal growth, with a lot of hard knocks and misses, not hits, along the way refutes this ridiculous theory. — rcg) The Beatles were presented as the “good guys” (who turned rebellious and bad? — rcg) and the Stones were the “bad guys,” who took drugs and were generally degraded (Beatles, of course, took drugs too, but it was done behind the scenes, at least at first). This is typical Illuminati agenda: to create two sides of the same coin to have a game going. Which group do you like, the Beatles or the Stones? You almost had to choose sides back in the 1960’s. John Lennon, supposedly, in a late interview, actually admitted to that the Beatles were a CIA experiment, although I haven’t been able to verify if this is a true or just disinformation. (Then why bring it up? What Lennon said was that if the government created LSD to enslave people, it had the opposite effect of setting people “free,” including himself, who refused to be bound, personally or creatively — a case in point being the song “Revolution,” which poked fun at the establishment and social engineers. — rcg)

One thing people are not aware of is that the back beat and the rhythm in rock music have very occult origins and go back to the Mystery Schools of old Babylon. But even if we stay within the 20th Century, we find that rock music is something that was born out of the occult traditions. Modern rock music can be traced back to the teachings of the 20th Century occultist, illuminist and ‘Satanist’ Aleister Crowley (1875-1947). This is why so many rock stars are into Crowley’s stuff. The Beatles were into him, and so are/were the Rolling Stones, Black Sabbath, Sting, Jim Morrison, David Bowie, Elton John, Led Zeppelin and many, many more. Jimmy Page from Led Zeppelin, by the way, is probably the most fanatic Crowley disciple in the music industry, ever. He once had the 2nd largest Crowley collection of books and occult material in the world, and even bought Crowley’s old residence near Loch ness in Scotland. Some people say Crowley was not an Illuminist, but that is not true. He was a 99th degree of the Order of Memphis and Misraïm, which actually is the REAL Illuminati Order, where a few selected people go after have completed the 33 degrees of Freemasonry. More on the Illuminati degrees can be studied here: http://www.illuminati-news.com/112606c.htm. Crowley was a black magician, no matter what people think. His magick (spelled with a k at the end to separate it from stage magic, and some ‘evil tongues’ say the k also stands for black, like in black magick) is commonly used by the black magicians within the Illuminati.

There is a lot to say about rock music, and there is no time to go into it all here. For more details, I suggest people read the “rock and roll and mind control” section of my website. However, there are a few details I would like to mention:

I want to emphasize that before people make their own conclusions about what I have to say about rock music, it is important that they at least skim through most of the articles I have posted on the subject. Too many people read a headline and a paragraph or two, then they email me and say I am a piece of shit for trying to have them stop listening to their favorite music, and that I am a Christian fanatic. That “accusation” only proves they haven’t read much, because I am not even Christian, which I make pretty clear. Now, I am NOT trying to have people stop listening to their favorite music at all – I want to make sure everybody understands that. Personally, I still listen to many of my favorite bands, although I know what is going on behind the scenes. However, we all NEED to know what this is all about, otherwise we will not understand the whole picture, and what is affecting us subconsciously. And if we don’t understand this vital subject, we will never be free from their manipulation. Therefore I say, go ahead and listen to whatever you want as long as you know what’s behind it. When you know the truth, you are unlikely to be manipulated – at least that’s my theory. And you will listen to the music with totally new ears – I do! It’s still often great music.

Most people have heard the phrase: “I sold my soul for rock ‘n’ roll”. With other words, the artist supposedly sold his/her soul to Satan in exchange for glory and fame, riches, drugs, rock and roll and an abundance of sex. We say: “OK, but that’s just a myth and a good story”. But is it really? Why don’t we ask the artists themselves? Many of them have actually come out and confessed that this is actually what they have been doing, and they are serious about it! Take Bob Dylan as an example. He was interviewed by late Ed Bradley on “60 Minutes” just recently. This interview was posted on video-google until a few weeks ago, when it was taken down for unknown reasons. In this very interesting interview, Bradley asked Dylan how he could write such incredible songs in the 60’s, and Dylan said he had no idea (Dylan was being coy and humble. Often his lyrics were political and anti-establishment, not at all flattering of those who might have programmed him — rcg) He was convinced he didn’t write them. They were “written for him” by “someone else,” and he did not mean another composer, but something from the spiritual world (a muse, which is just a way of describing one’s conscious imagination? Of course he would take credit if forced to. He certainly wouldn’t give businessmen credit for anything he did: he loathed them — rcg) He started quoting the lyrics from his masterpiece: “It’s alright ma, I’m only bleeding.” He said something to the effect: “You just don’t write lyrics like that. They were magically written.” (The mind is a mysterious thing, given us by God, imbued with free will, which defies even our abilities to understand it. Dylan was and is the ultimate free thinker. — rcg)

Then he goes on and accidentally mentions that he sold his soul to the devil a long time ago (A euphemism for the industry artists much operate in. Dylan is a Christian. In the same interview he gave credit to “his Captain,” a reference to Jesus. — rcg) When he realizes that his tongue had slipped, he found himself and stopped in the middle of a sentence. Bradley did not let the mistake on Dylan’s part pass unnoticed, though, and elaborated on it. Dylan then admitted he had to continue being on the road, year after year, as a part of the bargain he had with the “Lord of this World,” which Christians know is the devil (who imposes on us the need to survive unlike what was once found in Eden, to which we will return. — rcg) Excerpts from this interview can be read here: http://www.illuminati-news.com/art-and-mc/field-of-art.htm. Scroll down to the Bob Dylan section.

Dylan is just one in a crowd of artists that have messed with the occult and made a bargain with the demonic realms and been possessed by entities who are actually helping them write their songs. (If he ever did, he doesn’t now, and hasn’t since the mid-70‘s — rcg) Elton John admitted to the exact same thing when it comes to his music. He said something to the effect that writing an album like “Yellow Brick Road” in the mid 70’s was out of his league. He has no idea how that album came about. (Another humble reference to the mystery of imagination. What was he going to say? Yeah, I wrote it, and I’m great? Stream of consciousness creation by an artist does not in any way suggest mind control. Art is free … or it doesn’t happen. — rcg)

My research has led me to believe that most (if not all) of the super artists that have really been trend makers, are mind controlled slaves, created by the Illuminati to complete a certain task, and often enough, their managers are their handlers and controllers. These artists are, like I said, the trend makers, whom all the rest follow.

You have to have a certain attitude to make it in the music industry, and you have to be willing to be manipulated and controlled. Young artists think they can be famous by doing ‘their thing’, and the record companies will adjust to that. That only occurs if the artist happens to have the exact approach that the music industry is looking for at the moment. If not, THEY will decide how the artist should perform his/her stuff. If you don’t conform – no deal (all big labels are owned by the Illuminati, by the way – easy to verify).

For those who doubt the satanic, occult overtones in rock/pop music, I would strongly recommend the book: “Lucifer Rising” by Gavin Badderley, who happens to be the head of Church of Satan in Great Britain. His book exposes the satanic rock industry, and you would be surprised how many rock stars are members of Church of Satan! Badderley himself is interviewing artist after artist in the book, and they all admit to being Satanists. The book should be available in any well sorted bookstore.

So what is the purpose with the occult rock music? The purpose is to reach the minds of our youth. Of course, death metal for example is openly satanic, and so is Marilyn Manson, both in their lyrics and music, but this is not often the case with the rest of the rock/pop music genre. Instead, the occult/satanic messages are hidden in the lyrics or in backward messages, also called “back-masking.”

Here is another important thing: For those who don’t know what a “riff” is in rock music, I’ll try to explain it here in a few words. A riff is a beat or a sequence or a pattern, played in a certain order over and over again as a part of the background rhythm; it sometimes has the form of a melody itself. We have a typical example of a riff in “Satisfaction” by the Rolling Stones (same pattern repeated over and over by Keith Richard’s electric guitar). These riffs can be pretty seductive and put us in a light trance. This, plus the back beat, is what is so attractive and great about rock music, and no matter if people know what a riff or a back beat is or not, they just feel great without knowing why. Nothing’s wrong with that, as long as it stops there. However, if you add occult or satanic messages upon that, when the listener is in a state of light trance, the lyrics go right into your subconscious mind and may affect your way of thinking, without you even noticing it. So, to simplify it, the purpose of rock music is to have our youth interested in the occult, degrade them and have them rebel against their parents to destroy the family unit (a major goal for them), create violence and apathy and to be brought down to a certain level of consciousness, where they are easily manipulated. They are trying to create a generation that can easily accept the New World Order as something good.

Most teenagers these days don’t listen to the lyrics, and therefore they say the lyrics won’t affect them. Nothing could be further from the truth! In fact, if you DONT listen to the lyrics, you are more prone to be negatively affected by hidden messages than if you listen to and analyze the lyrics. What you don’t consciously absorb goes directly into your subconscious mind and will affect you unconsciously.

The question is: did these artists ACTUALLY make a pact with the Devil, or what is really going on here? Personally, I think it all comes down to mind control. I know for sure many of our greatest and most popular artists have multiple personalities, most certainly made such through trauma based mind control. I am corresponding with, and have corresponded with, a whole lot of mind controlled slaves in general, who have escaped, or were in the process of escaping, from the Illuminati. They have, independently from each other, pointed out the same artists as being multiples. How do they know? Well, if anybody would know, it would be them. They recognize things in others that we don’t necessarily notice.

According to those people, Bob Dylan is definitely a multiple, so are/were Jim Morrison, John Lennon, Britney Spears, Joan Baez, Curt Cobain, Elton John, Elvis Presley and many more. These artists have been specifically pointed out, both by the mind controlled slaves and different researchers, among them Fritz Springmeier, he himself a multiple.

However, I am not saying that all artists are mind controlled or directly part of the agenda; only the ones who are the real trend makers and super artists. These are heavily promoted by the industry and the media. The rest, the majority, just jump on the bandwagon, making a similar kind of music that the record industry is looking for at the moment, and they go through their careers quite ignorant of what is happening on a higher level. By the way, another important thing: the whole country music industry is nothing but a huge drug smuggling front for the Brotherhood. And most of the artists in Memphis are drug smugglers and mind controlled slaves, programmers or handlers. Don’t believe me? Again, read Springmeier’s books, plus TranceFormation of America, by Cathy O’Brien (former mind control slave) and Mark Phillips. After having read the latter, there can be little doubt in anyone’s mind that this is the truth. Also, there are videos on video.google and YouTube, where you can watch Cathy O’Brien and Mark Phillips in action, trying to find justice. It is very moving and very, very real.

There is much more to know, and I suggest that people check out an article I wrote a few years ago, which I constantly update: “Mind Control in the Field of Art”: and also “Artists under Scrutiny,” which confirms what I’ve been talking about here.

One last thing I want to add: it’s not just rock music. We have the same agenda going on here, regardless if it’s punk, rap, rave, hip-hop, and grunge or whatever. No difference, same thing.

MAD: It reminds me of the old legend of Robert Johnson (1911-1938) selling his soul to the Devil at the Crossroads so he could play the blues. Arguably the first musician of the rhythm and blues era to die at twenty seven, he was a huge influence on groups like Led Zeppelin, Hendrix, Dylan, and The Rolling Stones. Moving into a related subject, how do you see the topic of Zionism as fitting into the structure of the media, Hollywood, and the entertainment industry?

WES: Many people think that Zionism is the religion of the Jews. Nothing could be more wrong. Zionism is not a religion, first of all, but a political movement, and has nothing to do with the ordinary Jew. In fact, most Jews oppose Zionism as being evil and want to have nothing to do with it.

One thing I had a hard time grasping was why Christians are whole-heartedly supporting Israel, the Zionist state, although they know about the New World Order, and that Israel was founded by the Illuminati to create a Zionist state for their own purposes. [Interestingly enough, as a side line, the word Israel can be split up into three words: Is-Ra-El, where Is stands for Isis, the occult goddess, Ra for Ra, the Sun God, worshipped by the Illuminati, and El for Saturn, which is no one less but Satan himself. Quite something].

I asked quite a few Christians about this contradiction, but I never got a straight answer, until I asked one particular Christian, whom I did some research with in the past. He said that “God is working in mysterious ways, and he is probably using his enemies to build God’s chosen Country”. He didn’t sound too sure about it, like if he’d been wondering about this himself, but at least I now understood how Christians, who know about the Agenda, may think about Israel and why they support it.

Some say the Zionists are the ones behind the New World Order, but I don’t agree. Yes, they are a big and important part of the whole Illuminati network, and many Illuminists are also Zionists, but to say that Illuminism is equivalent to Zionism is simply not correct. It is very interesting, though, to read from The Talmud. It is extremely anti-Semitic in the sense that it looks down on everyone who is not a Zionist. It’s shocking to read it. As an example, it says a Jew can lie as much as he wants to non-Jews, and killing a non-Jew is not a crime. There are worse things than that even, mentioned in this evil book.

For those who want to know more about the true nature of Zionism, please read this shocking article from my website: The Harold Wallace Rosenthal interview. Even I was shocked! (Haven’t read it, yet. MORE TO COME — rcg)

British Official: Obama Plans to Sign Treaty Ceding U.S. Sovereignty

by R. Carter Gray

President Barack Obama may not be the Antichrist but reportedly he is poised to do something momentous which may reveal him to be grossly ignorant of Christian eschatology and the biblical warnings about the formation of a one-world government. A former adviser to ex-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher is the bearer of the news that will no doubt be troubling to a majority of Americans: the U.S. president intends to sign a U.N.-backed “climate debt” treaty in December in Copenhagen which will bring the so-called New World Order one step closer to reality, ceding, some pundits say, U.S. sovereignty to a global entity.

“I read the treaty,” Lord Christopher Monckton told members of a free-market institute event held recently in St. Paul, Minnesota. “And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created.” Lord Monckton explained that the global climate-related treaty will transfer wealth “from the countries of the West to third-world countries,” a transfer of wealth which he said would be governed and enforced by a world body.

“So, thank you, America,” Lord Monckton said in his keynote address. “You were the beacon of freedom to the world. It is a privilege merely to stand on this soil of freedom while it is still free. But, in the next few weeks, unless you stop it, your president will sign your freedom, your democracy, and your humanity away forever. And neither you nor any subsequent government you may elect will have any power whatsoever to take it back.”

He continued, “I’ve seen this stuff about (world) government and climate debt and enforcement. They are going to do this whether you like it or not.”

A copy of the treaty may be accessed at wattsupwiththat.com, according to a report.

In a question-and-answer session following his address the former high-ranking British adviser suggested to his audience that Obama’s “potential illegitimacy as president” might be an option open to Americans opposed to the treaty. However, he reiterated, “Once he’s signed it and ratified it, and your Senate ratifies it, you’re bound by it.”

Lord Monckton said that the White House is concerned that it might not have the 67 votes in the Senate — a two-thirds majority — necessary to ratify the treaty, which he said would be signed at the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen.

The international agreement, which European and other world leaders are expected to “rubber stamp, will have three “basic pillars,” Lord Monckton said. “The scheme” for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will feature “a facilitative mechanism, a financial mechanism, and the basic organization” which will allow for enforcement by a global executive board responsible for the management of the new funds and related “facilitative processes and bodies.” This portion of the treaty, he said, bears the heading “World Government.”

Mayan Elder: 2012 Theories Are Fantasies of the West

In this photo taken Oct. 3, 2009, Guatemalan Mayan Indian elder Apolinario Chile Pixtun poses for a portrait at the Iximche ceremonial site in Tecpan, Guatemala. Archaeologists, astronomers and modern-day Mayas shrug off the popular frenzy over the date of 2012, predicting it will bring nothing more than a meteor shower of new-age ‘consciousness,’ pseudo-science and alarmist television specials. (AP Photo/Moises Castillo)

by Mark Stevenson

MEXICO CITY –- Apolinario Chile Pixtun is tired of being bombarded with frantic questions about the Mayan calendar supposedly “running out” on Dec. 21, 2012. After all, it’s not the end of the world. Or is it?

Definitely not, the Mayan Indian elder insists. “I came back from England last year and, man, they had me fed up with this stuff.” It can only get worse for him. Next month Hollywood’s “2012″ opens in cinemas, featuring earthquakes, meteor showers and a tsunami dumping an aircraft carrier on the White House.

At Cornell University, Ann Martin, who runs the “Curious? Ask an Astronomer” Web site, says people are scared.

“It’s too bad that we’re getting e-mails from fourth-graders who are saying that they’re too young to die,” Martin said. “We had a mother of two young children who was afraid she wouldn’t live to see them grow up.”

Chile Pixtun, a Guatemalan, says the doomsday theories spring from Western, not Mayan ideas.

A significant time period for the Mayas does end on the date, and enthusiasts have found a series of astronomical alignments they say coincide in 2012, including one that happens roughly only once every 25,800 years.

But most archaeologists, astronomers and Maya say the only thing likely to hit Earth is a meteor shower of New Age philosophy, pop astronomy, Internet doomsday rumors and TV specials such as one on the History Channel which mixes “predictions” from Nostradamus and the Mayas and asks: “Is 2012 the year the cosmic clock finally winds down to zero days, zero hope?”

It may sound all too much like other doomsday scenarios of recent decades — the 1987 Harmonic Convergence, the Jupiter Effect or “Planet X.” But this one has some grains of archaeological basis.

One of them is Monument Six.

Found at an obscure ruin in southern Mexico during highway construction in the 1960s, the stone tablet almost didn’t survive; the site was largely paved over and parts of the tablet were looted.

It’s unique in that the remaining parts contain the equivalent of the date 2012. The inscription describes something that is supposed to occur in 2012 involving Bolon Yokte, a mysterious Mayan god associated with both war and creation.

However — shades of Indiana Jones — erosion and a crack in the stone make the end of the passage almost illegible.

Archaeologist Guillermo Bernal of Mexico’s National Autonomous University interprets the last eroded glyphs as maybe saying, “He will descend from the sky.”

Spooky, perhaps, but Bernal notes there are other inscriptions at Mayan sites for dates far beyond 2012 — including one that roughly translates into the year 4772.

And anyway, Mayas in the drought-stricken Yucatan peninsula have bigger worries than 2012.

“If I went to some Mayan-speaking communities and asked people what is going to happen in 2012, they wouldn’t have any idea,” said Jose Huchim, a Yucatan Mayan archaeologist. “That the world is going to end? They wouldn’t believe you. We have real concerns these days, like rain.”

The Mayan civilization, which reached its height from 300 A.D. to 900 A.D., had a talent for astronomy

Its Long Count calendar begins in 3,114 B.C., marking time in roughly 394-year periods known as Baktuns. Thirteen was a significant, sacred number for the Mayas, and the 13th Baktun ends around Dec. 21, 2012.

“It’s a special anniversary of creation,” said David Stuart, a specialist in Mayan epigraphy at the University of Texas at Austin. “The Maya never said the world is going to end, they never said anything bad would happen necessarily, they’re just recording this future anniversary on Monument Six.”

Bernal suggests that apocalypse is “a very Western, Christian” concept projected onto the Maya, perhaps because Western myths are “exhausted.”

If it were all mythology, perhaps it could be written off.

But some say the Maya knew another secret: the Earth’s axis wobbles, slightly changing the alignment of the stars every year. Once every 25,800 years, the sun lines up with the center of our Milky Way galaxy on a winter solstice, the sun’s lowest point in the horizon.

That will happen on Dec. 21, 2012, when the sun appears to rise in the same spot where the bright center of galaxy sets.

Another spooky coincidence?

“The question I would ask these guys is, so what?” says Phil Plait, an astronomer who runs the “Bad Astronomy” blog. He says the alignment doesn’t fall precisely in 2012, and distant stars exert no force that could harm Earth.

“They’re really super-duper trying to find anything astronomical they can to fit that date of 2012,” Plait said.

But author John Major Jenkins says his two-decade study of Mayan ruins indicate the Maya were aware of the alignment and attached great importance to it.

“If we want to honor and respect how the Maya think about this, then we would say that the Maya viewed 2012, as all cycle endings, as a time of transformation and renewal,” said Jenkins.

As the Internet gained popularity in the 1990s, so did word of the “fateful” date, and some began worrying about 2012 disasters the Mayas never dreamed of.

Author Lawrence Joseph says a peak in explosive storms on the surface of the sun could knock out North America’s power grid for years, triggering food shortages, water scarcity — a collapse of civilization. Solar peaks occur about every 11 years, but Joseph says there’s evidence the 2012 peak could be “a lulu.”

While pressing governments to install protection for power grids, Joseph counsels readers not to “use 2012 as an excuse to not live in a healthy, responsible fashion. I mean, don’t let the credit cards go up.”

Another History Channel program titled “Decoding the Past: Doomsday 2012: End of Days” says a galactic alignment or magnetic disturbances could somehow trigger a “pole shift.”

“The entire mantle of the earth would shift in a matter of days, perhaps hours, changing the position of the north and south poles, causing worldwide disaster,” a narrator proclaims. “Earthquakes would rock every continent, massive tsunamis would inundate coastal cities. It would be the ultimate planetary catastrophe.”

The idea apparently originates with a 19th century Frenchman, Charles Etienne Brasseur de Bourbourg, a priest-turned-archaeologist who got it from his study of ancient Mayan and Aztec texts.

Scientists say that, at best, the poles might change location by one degree over a million years, with no sign that it would start in 2012.

While long discredited, Brasseur de Bourbourg proves one thing: Westerners have been trying for more than a century to pin doomsday scenarios on the Maya. And while fascinated by ancient lore, advocates seldom examine more recent experiences with apocalypse predictions.

“No one who’s writing in now seems to remember that the last time we thought the world was going to end, it didn’t,” says Martin, the astronomy webmaster. “There doesn’t seem to be a lot of memory that things were fine the last time around.”

My Jesus On TV

With all the halls behind me, I sing a sadder tune
I read about the Antichrist and stare up at the moon
And if it never turns blood red, well that’s all right with me
If I live long enough I’ll see my Jesus on TV

The past was like a whirlwind; I made a lot of dough
I kissed the fancy women before and after shows
But I’ve hung up my rhinestones, they don’t shine anymore
I might build me a villa on the Riviera shores

But what I have won’t be enough to bring you back to me
I don’t have nothing really, but this banjo on my knee
Oh, Susanna don’t you cry, but still I hope you do
Remember when I held you tight and told you I love you?

Everyday the mail comes in the way it always has
People send me letters, photos, want my autograph
They ask me if I plan to tour and write some happy songs
But since the world is gonna end I won’t string them along

They say the oil will all be gone somewhere ‘bout twenty ten
Some think that this will be a signal to the aliens
They’ll want to make us think that they can save our way of life
They’ll want to take our women; they can start here with my wife

I’ve never met a Mayan; and I don’t care if I do
If they’re so smart how come we don’t see Maya in our schools?
I think the leaders gave their souls to Satan long ago
When Jesus comes to raise the dead, I’m gonna stand and crow!

The paradox is in effect: humble trump powerful
Just like my Jesus said they would, and so my heart is full
He told ‘em in advance and said the way it’s gonna be
And every eye will see him when My Jesus’s on TV

Is 2012 Bullshit?

It’s all a person can do to keep up with the madness that passes for “pop prophecy” these days. Stomaching The Da Vinci Code and trying to discern the motivations for a team of editors, researchers and ghostwriters to write a novel which makes wholly unsubstantiated claims in an effort to smear Jesus has been bad enough. (The Last Supper, having apparently been vandalized as the floating hand with a dagger shows, was grossly under-researched and misinterpreted.) Now there are these two guys — Thomas Horn and David Flynn — who efficiently but very questionably have managed to do what Dan Brown and company do not do in The Lost Symbol, which is tie the Great Seal of the United States to the date December 21, 2012 and the Mayan long-count calendar, which has been discussed and debated ad nauseam online and on the tube.

Horn, whose still-unpublished book Apollyon Rising 2012 is all the rage, has taken the unfinished pyramid on the back of the one-dollar bill and identified its 13 levels of bricks with the 13 baktun cycles in the Mayan calendar. Starting with the date 1776 which appears in Roman numerals at the bottom of the Great Seal, Horn finally arrives at the uncompleted top of the pyramid, which he says corresponds to the year 2012. From there he makes the claim that the destiny of the United States of America is and has always been the destiny of the world, which, in Horn’s opinion, ain’t good. And he says it ain’t good because America is going to give us and the world the Antichrist.

It’s not been easy working our way through Daniel and Revelation in recent months. We frankly did it somewhat reluctantly, not wishing to delve into highly symbolic, apocalyptic material that scholars and kooks have tried and often failed to interpret since the 2nd century. But it is Holy Writ, we believe (written by an obscured author?), and we believe Daniel does stand up as divine. Where Revelation is concerned, who’s to know whether someone has failed or not, since interpretations of bowl and woe judgments and the sounding of trumpets and the breaking of seals are largely left up to the individual imaginations and strained hermeneutics of anyone who wants to have a go. The only real link between Daniel and Revelation, that we can see, is the description of the Son of Man, who has hair “like pure wool,” interestingly, and that of the arrogant “horn” or “beast,” who, according to some online commentators, will lead the New World Order’s effort to reduce the world’s population by 1 to 3 billion people. The leg that people like Horn and Flynn have to stand on stems from their claim that there exists an occult elite which has infiltrated government and secret fraternal organizations for whom Jesus is anathema. The reality that such Gnostic leanings are present among the ranks of the powerful and the rich cannot be disputed. So, what do the occult elite have to do with 2012?

Will the powerful and rich occult elite do the bidding of some evil voice which has been whispering in their ears to kill off the useless eaters in an attempt to save the world for themselves? Is this what 2012 will be, a self-fulfilled prophecy, involving manmade catastrophes, which evil has been plotting since the origins of America if not the origins of humanity? Ludicrous.

But, there is the matter of the Islamic prophecy from three or four centuries ago that describes “a tall black man” rising in the West and commanding the world’s largest army, who will lead a final Islamic world revolution as Islam’s Imam or Mahdi, i.e. messiah. Unless the Muslims who claim to possess this prophecy are lying, this is rather stunning. But does this mean that Barack Obama is the so-called Antichrist, who will be the brutal tyrant inhabited by the spirit of Satan as Antiochus IV Epiphanes, King Herod, Nero and Hitler arguably were? Does this mean Obama will be the man who possesses supernatural gifts, enabling him to perform signs and wonders, after having been raised from the dead? Present reality says no. It says hell, no. Even though Obama requested that Christian symbols during his address at Georgetown University be covered to make the setting more secular, even though he may be a Muslim in Christian’s clothing, even though he was photographed recently standing with Russia’s president reportedly in front of a golden all-seeing eye of Horus, which adorns the one-dollar bill … Obama is confronted with not supernatural challenges but political ones, like health care and Iran. No magic wands have been whipped out yet, as far as we can tell, and no ouija boards or mediums or astrologers have been consulted, presumably, in the tradition of Nancy Reagan.  And can anyone see Obama, a leftist and socialist, leading an army to nuke anyone who stands in his way, most particularly Israel? 

Something new and dramatic will have to happen first for any of this to begin to play out. Horn says something is happening and will really begin to happen when a demonic force rises from the pit, “the abyss,” to empower the AC (a.k.a. Apollo, Nimrod, Gilgamesh, Osiris) and presumably the rest of the First Family. Imagine those little girls with the devil in their eyes or them and Michelle holding daddy by the edge of his coat, begging him not to go out anymore on a militaristic rampage to satisfy his lust for innocent blood. What a great idea for a novel. It could happen, if evil has been holding back or has been held back and is on the verge of making its grand entrance. For now, it’s all ludicrous. It all depends on God, as everything else does, and how angry he is that the people who are supposed to be leading us are actually plotting to kill and eat us. We do believe in hell and demons … and weird shit living underground which isn’t human. So who knows?

Since we’re on the subject of 2012, the AC and the like, we thought we would offer some questions which seem to us to be interesting ones: 

If the Great Tribulation begins when the Antichrist facilitates a peace treaty between Israel and her enemies, will that peace treaty be signed on December 21, 2012?

Is it significant that the death of Antiochus IV Epiphanes, a forerunner of the Antichrist, initiated Hanukkah, and that Hanukkah will fall on December 21 in the year 2011?

If the New Agers are talking up 2012, will the God of Israel in his wrath have any role in anything which might destructively occur in 2012? Or will man kill, maim and pillage the world’s most expendable … and blame it on God?

Does 2012 have anything to do with what the Hebrew prophets call the Day of the Lord?

Will the Day of the Lord have anything to do with 2012?

Whom do we trust … the Maya or the Hebrew prophets?

To restate a previous question, do the occult elite intend to try to fulfill biblical prophecy by bringing wrath upon the earth, either in 2012 or sometime thereafter?

Will the occult elite and the fallen angels, i.e. demons, combine to make sure that something destructively happens on December 21, 2012?

Will God punish the occult elite for trying to play God?

Are 2012, the Antichrist and America linked?

If 888 is the number for Jesus … and if 888 is the number for Apollo … is it significant that 888 plus 888 equals 1776?

Is it significant that 1948 plus Daniel’s 70 years equals 2008, the year Obama was elected?

Did the American forefathers believe that America was a New Eden, as Christopher Columbus did, as the Puritans did? And did they believe that America’s destiny was the destiny of the world?

Will the occult elite be surprised by the Rapture, if there is to be one?

Will the Antichrist be a vicious warmonger … or a moron who unintentionally triggers World War III?

Is 2012 bullshit? 

For What Prince Does Ishtar Moan?

Barely speaks so all can hear:
Things are not as they appear.
Son of Adam, Abraham …
Who does this one say I am?

Has the truth been hid away,
So the One’s not known today?
Well before this last election,
He suggested His complexion.

Does the new king now confirm
That the Savior’s skin was burned?
Virgin born, miraculous
Adam’s Son was slain for us.

An Islamic prophecy,
Eastern leanings we all see,
Not at war with those at war,
Will he close or open doors?

Eyes proceed down racial lines,
Pharaohs black with grand designs.
Pyramid lacks a capstone …
For what prince does Ishtar moan?

What other race would Jesus be?
What’s confirmed for you and me …
If the new king breaks new ground
And his skin is glistening brown?

Who was Jesus, his best friend?
Raise those questions yet again!
Speak so they can barely here:
Things are not as they appear.

Does it help or hinder things
If his words are given wings
So men know what to expect
And men know who to reject?

“We are watching you,” he said.
Look, a cloud climbs overhead.
Cloud of witnesses for me? …
Do they see the things I see?

Have they taken it to heart,
Unlocked puzzles, prophet’s art,
Or is so much not yet clear?
Things are not as they appear.

By what we have recommended
Are there things to be commended?
Does race tell another’s race?
Is this found in just one place?

If the world should know these things
Would you give these few words wings?
Or leave us in isolation
Till the world usurps God’s nation?

O Ba Ma (He is with us?)

by AMIR TAHERI, author of 10 books on Iran, the Middle East and Islam

(This article appeared in the Oct. 26, 2008 issue of Forbes Magazine, so it is not new information.) 

Is Barack Obama the “promised warrior” coming to help the Hidden Imam of Shiite Muslims conquer the world?

The question has made the rounds in Iran since last month, when a pro-government Web site published a Hadith (or tradition) from a Shiite text of the 17th century. The tradition comes from Bahar al-Anvar (meaning Oceans of Light) by Mullah Majlisi, a magnum opus in 132 volumes and the basis of modern Shiite Islam.

According to the tradition, Imam Ali Ibn Abi-Talib (the prophet’s cousin and son-in-law) prophesied that at the End of Times and just before the return of the Mahdi, the Ultimate Saviour, a “tall black man will assume the reins of government in the West.” Commanding “the strongest army on earth,” the new ruler in the West will carry “a clear sign” from the third imam, whose name was Hussein Ibn Ali. The tradition concludes: “Shiites should have no doubt that he is with us.”

In a curious coincidence Obama’s first and second names—Barack Hussein—mean “the blessing of Hussein” in Arabic and Persian. His family name, Obama, written in the Persian alphabet, reads O Ba Ma, which means “he is with us,” the magic formula in Majlisi’s tradition.

Mystical reasons aside, the Khomeinist establishment sees Obama’s rise as another sign of the West’s decline and the triumph of Islam. 

Tehran’s penchant for Obama, reflected in the official media, increased when the then-Illinois senator chose Joseph Biden as his vice-presidential running mate. Biden was an early supporter of the Khomeinist revolution in 1978-1979 and, for the past 30 years, has been a consistent advocate of recognizing the Islamic Republic as a regional power. He has close ties with Khomeinist lobbyists in the U.S. and has always voted against sanctions on Iran.

Ahmadinejad has described the U.S. as a “sunset” (ofuli) power as opposed to Islam, which he says is a “sunrise” (toluee) power. Last summer he inaugurated an international conference called World Without America — attended by anti-Americans from all over the world, including the U.S.

Apollo: Perdition's Son?

I.
E pluribus unum, the many into one:
Does it refer to the New Eden?
No? Will he rise, Apollyon?
From the pit, perdition’s son?

Osiris, Gilgamesh and Nimrod, too:
One demon-god with many names.
Is he coming to trample, thresh?
Should we give Saturn (Satan) the blame?

Daniel’s fourth beast with four horns:
Out of them rises the arrogant one,
Son of Zeus, what hell hath borne …
Is the tall Black Head Apollyon?

Or is he a forerunner of Apollo,
Sworn in with a Freemason’s gaze,
Fulfilling Islamic prophecy,
Hastening the end of days? (— Eliakim)

II.
“Now the last age by Cumae’s Sibyl sung Has come and gone,
And the majestic roll Of circling centuries begins anew:
Justice returns, returns old Saturn’s reign,
With a new breed of men sent down from heaven.
Only do thou, at the boy’s birth in whom
The iron shall cease, the golden race arise,
Befriend him, chaste Lucina; ‘tis thine own Apollo reigns. …

“He shall receive the life of gods,
And see Heroes with gods commingling,
And himself Be seen of them,
And with his father’s worth reign o’er a world … 



“Assume thy greatness, for the time draws nigh,
Dear child of gods, great progeny of Jove [Jupiter/Zeus]!
See how it totters—the world’s orbed might,
Earth, and wide ocean, and the vault profound,
All, see, enraptured of the coming time!” (— the poet Virgil)

III.
Now, brethren, concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our gathering together to Him, we ask you, not to be soon shaken in mind or troubled, either by spirit or by word or by letter, as if from us, as though the day of Christ had come. Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition (Apollo?), who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.

Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God from the beginning chose you for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and belief in the truth, to which He called you by our gospel, for the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.

Now may our Lord Jesus Christ Himself, and our God and Father, who has loved us and given us everlasting consolation and good hope by grace, comfort your hearts and establish you in every good word and work. (— the apostle Paul, 2 Thessalonians 2:1-17)

Whatever Happened to the Novel 'The Solomon Key'?

DID DAN BROWN GET COLD FEET, AS MAUREEN DOWD SUGGESTS?

We have not read the new novel attributed to Dan Brown The Lost Symbol, and we may not anytime soon, being unwilling to spend the nearly $40 to reward this preppie heretic and his publisher. But we have read reviews of the novel, including one by Maureen Dowd of The New York Times, in which she suggests that Brown and his team of editors/ghostwriters/researchers with this work has in effect kissed up to the Masons. She tells us in her column, which can be accessed on the Cryptex.com website, that Brown has disclosed no secrets and written nothing unflattering which might make him a target of Freemason henchmen, if such people exist. The Cryptex site also runs a letter from Brown declining to appear before a Scottish Rite gathering (do they wear kilts?) in which he suggests that he has considered joining the spooky secret society for boys only. 

But none of that, including how the novel reads, is really what interests us. What we’re interested in is what happened to The Solomon Key, the novel so named which was supposed to have been published several years back … but apparently was scrapped. The title has obviously changed, but was the whole novel reworked along with the original title? And what was the Solomon key as it was to have been featured in the novel which was reportedly ready years ago? The only thing associated with the word or name Solomon that we get in The Lost Symbol are several characters whose last names are Solomon. So where is the key? What was the key? Are there any references to Solomon “keys,” or Solomonis Clavicula (a handbook on witchcraft), or Solomon’s temple in the new novel? (Freemasons are into Solomon’s temple, Masonic temples being replicas of it. And then there is all that Hiram Abiff stuff, he having been a king of Tyre, a merchant, a bearer of some great secret who was killed by three Ethiopians.)

Is there any reference in the novel to the circular talisman covered with runes which correspond to the Washington Monument and other ancient sites around the world which align themselves with the constellation Orion — as this South African guy Wayne Herschel predicted on his website KeyofSolomon.net? Herschel refers to this talisman as the Key of Solomon. But it appears that Herschel has mispredicted the focus of Brown’s new novel. Well, did he have it right with the previous novel, if there was a previous novel different than the one we have now? The title Solomon Key would seem to suggest that what we have in The Lost Symbol is a brand new novel. We’ve set email to Herschel with no success, but we’ll stay on this. 

Since the title The Solomon Key was scrapped … will we ever see a novel from Brown with that title? And if the novel was scrapped and then rewritten … why was it? So far we can’t find anyone who has any answers.

"Renovations" on the Mount?

In the summer of 2002, not long after a water stain appeared on the Western (Wailing) Wall, we began to have a series of “pictures” flash in our mind’s eye. The images repeated themselves frequently in the months that followed. Then these mental images revealed themselves to us more visually in the form of lucid dreams, during which we “watched” just before waking — being aware that we were awake — these images. They became so frequent and stirring that we felt the need to go and see a rabbi. We didn’t believe that we were special or that we would be telling him something that he didn’t already suspect. We didn’t go to see the rabbi because we wanted to impress him. We simply wanted some affirmation, something we weren’t going to get at home (from my wife and two children, who, like me, are Christians).

The images were surreal. They no longer occur. We saw a wall of moss-covered stones, brown-green in color, “breathing” — that is the wall was heaving in and out like a person’s chest. And then this wall of stones would burst, releasing a torrent of water. We would then look into a very deep chasm, which was pitch black. We watched with our eyes closed, fully awake. In successive experiences of these images we would be conscious of being sure that we were actually seeing something out of the ordinary. Seeing these images in this way must have been the real thing, because we had never experienced anything like them, and, they were recurring. So it wasn’t something we ate. Once these lucidly dreamed images became rather routine, we began to see some other things, which dazzled us: a picture frame made of stained glass, filled with geometric shapes, which rotated at its corners. And inside the frame was a huge rectangular box of gold with steps all around it, upon which people were ascending and descending. Not long after this we began to see (this is the best way I can describe it) pivoting sheets of paper, which would rotate/pivot partially 1-2-3 … and then peel rapidly away. It happened to the right and to the left.

Then the images were on the move, and we would travel over a surface of hills covered with beads of colored light, while a riot of shapes doing indescribable things, rapidly changing, appeared and disappeared and reappeared. All colors. Crazy. Spectacular. (We don’t use hallucinogenic drugs.) After three or four months in the fall of 2002, and only sporadically thereafter, all of this ceased, to our disappointment. The thoughts which accompanied all of this, especially the breathing and exploding stones, was that a mother’s water had burst and a birth was going to occur. At this time we had never studied any of the marital or birthing symbolism which appears in the Hebrew scriptures — and then we found related symbols and meaning everywhere. We landed on Jeremiah 31:21-22 (link in the pink “skybox” above) which blew us away, because this very unusual pair of verses seemed to be suggesting that a woman, an elderly wife, would be made a virgin and would give birth to a man. It’s one of the strangest passages in all of scripture. We then began to imagine Israel and the entire Levant as a woman, with the Dead Sea representing a woman’s vagina. These were ideas and not visionary images.

The more we studied the more we found scripture relevant to Israel’s restoration which involved water — rivers, pools, streams in the desert, etc., lush growth. And so what we felt we were experiencing at least had some significance to what the future might hold. By the way, when bulges began to form at two places in the walls surrounding the Temple Mount in the following months and years, one notably near the Al-Aqsa mosque, we felt that our experiences were being confirmed. It seems more likely that one day there would be a “renovation” at the Temple Mount in a way that benefited the Jews. The bulges however were fixed. But will there be more evidence of deterioration at the Temple Mount to come? The structural integrity of walls to the south and east and to the west continues to be an issue, though the Waqf (which controls and maintains the Temple Mount for the Arabs) tells us that everything is under control. Water can cut through rock given enough time. A final renovation surely would spell redemption was nigh. Ezekiel’s temple plans which feature water flowing beneath the altar come to mind.

As Israelis and Palestinians clash over who belongs on the Temple Mount and who doesn’t, and as Israel’s prime minister assures the Arab world that Israel is not excavating beneath the Temple Mount with the intention of bringing it down, we cannot help but revisit these images which we saw seven years ago and which we reported to a rabbi for the Conservative congregation in the town where we live. We subsequently began attending worship services there at B’nai Zion and taking courses in Hebrew at the synagogue, by the way, and formed a lasting friendship with the rabbi, who became a frequent lunch partner.

The last point we wish to make is this: there are reported to be millions of gallons of water held in natural reservoirs beneath the Temple Mount, and there is a natural pulsing of the water at the Gihon Spring or Virgin’s Fount, so much so that a person can reportedly set his watch by the rhythmic pulses of water. We can imagine, even though we don’t know, that the Palestinians one day will be unable to prevent the inevitable … and that water in huge amounts will bring to pass this renovation, dropping both the Al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock into pits when the platform collapses. Earthquakes over the centuries since the 7th century have destroyed the mosques built on the Temple Mount.

Though some, including rabbis, urge the Jews to keep their distance from the Temple Mount, perhaps one day, perhaps soon, there will be no reasons left to stay away, with no structures sacred to Islam left standing. Will God do this thing, bring about renovations on the Mount, cleansing the Temple Mount of what exists wrongly and bloodily on that altar? … We’ll have to see. By the way, we’ve never been to Jerusalem. 

Oh, one last thing … we also saw in our mind’s eye that the area where the Wailing Wall is now would one day be a pool. 

Does any of this account for anything? It doesn’t if no naturally occurring renovations ever happen — in which case we will mark all of this up as being personally interesting, meaningful and colorful lucid dreams with an end times cast.

One Last Point ... ?

LIBERAL SCHOLARS FAIL TO SEE THE LINK AND THE “FOREST” ISAIAH 39 AND 40 REVEAL

Between chapters 39 and 40 of Isaiah liberal scholars have assigned a point of division and suggested two different men writing under the name of Isaiah wrote respectively the chapters which come before and which follow this point. They say these two sections are too dissimilar in style and content to have been written by one man under the influence of God. But what appears in these two chapters where some scholars cut the book approximately in half suggests divine continuity nonetheless. There is prophetic strength and integrity in these two chapters, which both in their own way show that divine vision and artistry were at work when they were written. If continuity exists here, then continuity, achieved by one hand, arguably must reign throughout. 

In chapter 39 Isaiah foretells the end of Judah as Judeans had known it; in chapter 40 Isaiah wastes no time or words in offering hope for restoration, which would (and will) come gradually following the Babylonian captivity and worldwide dispersion of the Jews. If Isaiah’s chapter 39 prophecy is profound as it is, could not the same God who inspired it inspire the same man to tell of the astounding forerunning events which herald the messiah and which heralds the restoring messianic reign — defying any arbitrary division assigned by scholars?

Scholars who argue for multiple authors of Isaiah are too blinded by the trees, that is the mechanics of the writing, to see the forest, which is the apparent working of the hand of a timeless and sovereign God. In chapter 40, Isaiah, arguably foreseeing the blinding arrogance of scholars and the vain “judges,” refers to them as “grasshoppers,” “princes” who are brought “to nothing.”

What is remarkable about chapter 40 is the majesty of its words, the author’s soaring description of the power and glory of the God who has inspired Isaiah no less magnificently in the preceding 39 chapters. In light of this, I see no division between chapters 39 and 40 but rather a breathtaking reversal of fortunes, the eager mercy of a God who seeks quickly to tell of the eventual gracious outcome of the punishment he would impose. If we take into consideration the messianic role of Cyrus, “the righteous man of the east” as he is described in chapter 41 and later by name in chapters 44 and 45, what the king of Persia did to end the Babylonian captivity which is foretold in chapter 39 unmistakably establishes a messianic link between the two chapters scholars would divide.

On Good (Love) and Evil

Good (love) and evil coexist. 

God is love.

God is the creator and ruler of all things. 

Why does evil exist?

True love cannot be forced. God does not force us to love him. For true love to exist people must have the freedom to choose to love or to choose not to love, which is evil. This freedom allows people to choose evil. 

Love and evil coexist.

Those who love God hate evil.

Those who choose evil hate God.

Those who have chosen to love God can see and know that those who have chosen evil have chosen wrongly.

Those who have chosen evil believe that those who have chosen to love God are no better than they are.  Therefore, evil people typically have no conscience. 

Those who love God fear God.

Those who hate God do not fear God. Those who hate God hate those who love God.

God disciplines those who love him. 

God leaves alone those who hate him.

God disciplines us by allowing evil into our lives.

God entraps those who have chosen evil by leaving them alone.

Love and life must one day overcome evil and death.

God has promised one day to destroy all evil.

The books of Daniel and Revelation, though difficult to understand, are worth understanding because they reveal the nature of God and his plan for humanity, which includes his dealings with the Jews and non-Jews (i.e. Gentiles, the nations, among whom are Christians).

To understand Daniel and Revelation is to understand the present coexistence of good (love) and evil and the ultimate rewarding of good (love) and the punishment of evil.

It is illogical to believe that evil will not be punished. Only those who have chosen love understand this. Evil does not fear punishment.

Goodness (love) eagerly awaits the punishment of evil.

How much more evil can the world become?

The nations of the world increasingly are rejecting God’s antidote for evil and death, which is Jesus. The Jews as times before more evil await the coming of their Messiah. Those non-Jews who have rejected Jesus and chosen evil will be punished. The Jews and Christians will be redeemed and made as one.

The two things — the coming of the Messiah and the ultimate destruction of evil — will happen simultaneously.

"A naturalist commenting upon the supernatural is akin to a person who does not remember his dreams offering his services as a dream therapist."

— rcg

(A statement in response to liberal scholars who question the validity of prophetic scripture in the Bible) 

Shroud of Turin Tit-for-Tat Has A New Wrinkle

The Image On The Right Is The Reproduction(EDITOR’S NOTE: On the heels of new scientific reports (2008) claiming that the 1988 Carbon 14 dating of the Shroud of Turin is inaccurate because the sample used was a repaired portion of the cloth — meaning the Shroud could perhaps be 2,000 years old after all — comes this story about a scientist’s recreation of the image which resurrects the view that the shroud is a hoax from the 13th century. A burial shroud originating in the Middle Ages would of course mean it wasn’t used to wrap Jesus’ body. It is a hoax, it isn’t a hoax. It is, it isn’t. Never has so much been discouragingly made of a religious relic which has “sinfully” found its way into the hands of scientists.

It doesn’t really mean anything if some scientist cooked up a new one, does it? Not if the technology to do the same didn’t exist in the 13th century.)  

ROME (Reuters) – An Italian scientist says he has reproduced the Shroud of Turin, a feat that he says proves definitively that the linen some Christians revere as Jesus Christ’s burial cloth is a medieval fake.

The shroud, measuring 14 feet, 4 inches by 3 feet, 7 inches bears the image, eerily reversed like a photographic negative, of a crucified man some believers say is Christ.

“We have shown that is possible to reproduce something which has the same characteristics as the Shroud,” Luigi Garlaschelli, who is due to illustrate the results at a conference on the para-normal this weekend in northern Italy, said on Monday.

A professor of organic chemistry at the University of Pavia, Garlaschelli made available to Reuters the paper he will deliver and the accompanying comparative photographs.

The Shroud of Turin shows the back and front of a bearded man with long hair, his arms crossed on his chest, while the entire cloth is marked by what appears to be rivulets of blood from wounds in the wrists, feet and side. Carbon dating tests by laboratories in Oxford, Zurich and Tucson, Arizona in 1988 caused a sensation by dating it from between 1260 and 1390. Sceptics said it was a hoax, possibly made to attract the profitable medieval pilgrimage business.

But scientists have thus far been at a loss to explain how the image was left on the cloth.

Garlaschelli reproduced the full-sized shroud using materials and techniques that were available in the middle ages. They placed a linen sheet flat over a volunteer and then rubbed it with a pigment containing traces of acid. A mask was used for the face.

The pigment was then artificially aged by heating the cloth in an oven and washing it, a process which removed it from the surface but left a fuzzy, half-tone image similar to that on the Shroud. He believes the pigment on the original Shroud faded naturally over the centuries.

They then added blood stains, burn holes, scorches and water stains to achieve the final effect.

The Catholic Church does not claim the Shroud is authentic nor that it is a matter of faith, but says it should be a powerful reminder of Christ’s passion.

One of Christianity’s most disputed relics, it is locked away at Turin Cathedral in Italy and rarely exhibited. It was last on display in 2000 and is due to be shown again next year.

Garlaschelli expects people to contest his findings.

“If they don’t want to believe carbon dating done by some of the world’s best laboratories they certainly won’t believe me,” he said.

The accuracy of the 1988 tests was challenged by some hard-core believers who said restorations of the Shroud in past centuries had contaminated the results.

The history of the Shroud is long and controversial.

After surfacing in the Middle East and France, it was brought by Italy’s former royal family, the Savoys, to their seat in Turin in 1578. In 1983 ex-King Umberto II bequeathed it to the late Pope John Paul.

The Shroud narrowly escaped destruction in 1997 when a fire ravaged the Guarini Chapel of the Turin cathedral where it is held. The cloth was saved by a fireman who risked his life.

Garlaschelli received funding for his work by an Italian association of atheists and agnostics but said it had no effect on his results.

“Money has no odor,” he said. “This was done scientifically. If the Church wants to fund me in the future, here I am.”

Rejecting Some Supernaturalism ... Is to Reject It All

Higher critics of Isaiah and Daniel who reject their authenticity use the same argument to condemn both, and that is that someone, or two people, lurking in the shadows decided to have a go at writing prophetic material, after Cyrus’ name was known and after prophesied events had taken place, which is to say that they weren’t truly prophets. So, in effect, they’re rejecting the idea that any Hebrew could be a prophet or that any Hebrew has ever been a prophet. Would they apply this same assessment to Jesus, or do they doubt that he lived, that he was a prophet and that he performed the miracles that he is credited with performing? If Jesus did perform the miracles with which he is credited, why is it difficult for the higher critics to accept the lives and work of any other Hebrew prophets?

Specifically the critics of Isaiah reject that a prophet writing in the 8th century B.C. could have named the invading deliverer of the Jews in exile in Babylon, i.e. Cyrus, more than a century before Cyrus was born. Do these same critics also reject Moses’ miraculous deliverance of the Israelites from the Egyptians? Do they reject the abilities of Joseph and Daniel to have foretold precisely the dreams of their respective overlords? Do they reject the idea that the same God of Israel, whom Jesus credited with his miracles, raised Jesus from the dead? Do any of these critics consider themselves Christians? If they do, why would they?

The greatest defense of Isaiah as a prophet and that one man wrote the entire book of Isaiah is the evidence of other prophetic material in the book written obviously by a lucid and artful writer. Only a madman would have presumed to have been a prophet and to have written on behalf of God, if he did not in fact derive his inspiration from God. But Isaiah was not a madman, he was lucid and artful, and all of his work arguably concerns itself with the future — his immediate future and the far distant future — of Israel, which has very arguably been chosen to play a role in human history, a role which they have played and are playing. 

To reject supernaturalism in one place in any of the prophets is to reject all supernaturalism and all prophetic material; it is to reject, specifically as pertains to Isaiah, that Cyrus was a benevolent messianic figure altogether, a messianic forerunner, whose decree accomplished what Jeremiah said would be accomplished: the end of the Jewish captivity after 70 years in exile. If the Cyrus prophecies found in chapters 44 and 45 of Isaiah are fraudulent, then why not condemn all of scripture as fraudulent, incapable of inspiring the biblical figures such as Jesus and the writer of John’s Gospel, who, as Jesus did, quotes Isaiah? John just so happens to quote Isaiah from chapter 6, which falls within the first 39 chapters of Isaiah, and chapter 53, which falls within the last 27 chapters of Isaiah, which the critics ascribe to Deutero-Isaiah. Wouldn’t Jesus and John have known they were quoting a fraud?

Simply because the critics are themselves lagging in belief and faith and unwilling to acknowledge the presence in Israel’s history of supernaturalism, which is what they are doing, doesn’t mean the rest of us have to be — and yet their influence on believers and non-believers is considerable, whose faith in something greater and more powerful than themselves is hindered, if not destroyed by the arguments of these critics. I wonder if the higher critics of Isaiah and Daniel have taken into account that they will be held accountable for their actions, the grieving of the Holy Spirit, as it were, the refuting of God’s ability to do supernatural things, which includes giving some of us the gift of faith.

Finally, I recently heard a teacher teaching Isaiah introduce at the beginning of his sessions how it was that the book of Isaiah reflected the entire Bible: that just as there are 66 chapters in Isaiah there are 66 books in the Christian Bible, and that just as Isaiah is separated in content and style with 39 chapters in one section and 27 in the last one, so are the Hebrew scriptures and the Christian scriptures likewise divided in the Christian Bible, 39 books and 27 books. Is this a coincidence? Perhaps, but perhaps not. Would a so-called Proto-Isaiah and a Deutero-Isaiah have conferred with one another so that the entire book should come out that way?

From the Beginning ...

I often wonder what “higher critics” or liberal Bible scholars and anti-dispensationalists (anti-God-has-a-plan people) think of the events which are unfolding in the Middle East, specifically in Israel, and around the world. I often wonder if they’re impressed with urgent statements like those of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak who recently urged Israel to resume peace talks with the Palestinians, warning that the peace process could not endure “another failure.” That would seem to be the sentiment of a lot of people — that it’s now or never. I wonder if scholars who don’t place much emphasis on the supernatural, prophetic aspects of scripture are ever swayed by reports like those telling us that Russia intends to help Iran enrich uranium even as Iran’s president threatens to wipe Israel off the face of the earth.

Scripture calls for those types of threats. But scripture also says that Israel will prevail, as she has always prevailed, against the odds, because God is with her.

It isn’t as if these times are like any previous others. It isn’t like a hostile Arab neighbor of Israel has ever been this close to having the bomb with its president rattling a saber which could result in World War III and a new holocaust. It isn’t like there aren’t preparations for the building of a third temple in Jerusalem being methodically taken. I suppose even the miracle that Israel exists at all after its complete destruction 2,000 years ago is lost on those people who don’t see anything eschatological in current events.

Maybe they do, but they just aren’t saying anything. Maybe as they are downplaying the precision with which times such as these have been forecast that they are secretly hoping to be proved wrong. Or maybe though they’re close observers of things, details … they really aren’t paying that much attention, though they have had no reluctance to weigh in on the prophetic material in Daniel and Isaiah which they believe is fraudulent, written after the fact.

In all honesty, I can relate to how such scholars must feel: in the day-to-day grind of things, it’s easy to feel and believe that God is not present. But of course he is present. We simply lack the receptors sensitive enough and tuned in enough to experience him. Experiencing God comes with mental anguish, not with a good education and the ability to parse words and imagine what if. Experiencing God comes with dying to self and looking forward to the next world. Experiencing God is recognizing that no matter how much we would like to think otherwise, death awaits for each of us … and that means we have to do business with a force that is a whole lot bigger than we are and a lot harder to gauge than what seems right on the surface of things.

We need scholars. God bless ‘em. But we need visionary poets, too — broken ones like Isaiah, Daniel and Jeremiah, whom scholars second guess, but who because they were crushed had no other way to turn but to God. That’s the only way that we turn to God and fine-tune our receptors which earnestly seek him in humility. That’s where the sensitivity comes from that goes beyond our educations.

It’s only right that things should gradually become less and less God-like in our world, because that is part of God’s plan, too. Israel will want her God as never before. I’d like to be in the company of those scholars who doubt now, when they finally come to the realization of how that’s going to work, that a sovereign God has a plan … and how it has been that human history has been building toward the conclusion of it from the beginning. 

The Bigger Prophetic Picture

Collectively, the Hebrew prophets put forth an extreme, ever-expanding message: judgment and punishment for a chosen people and divine restoration and redemption not only for those same people but for the world at large. In looking at the story of the Hebrews and the Jews, we see one God’s expression of himself and his standards and mankind’s failure to obey and abide by the code of behavior God has set forth. There is hopelessness for those people who cannot meet God’s standards … but there is yet hope, a gracious reversal of fortunes, which only a sovereign God could deliver. Given history, there ought not be any Jews, there ought not be a nation of Israel, there ought not be any hope that it will come about by and of and through the Jews that the world will be delivered from its disobedience, sin and death and redeemed by one man …

But there are Jews, there is a nation of Israel … and there is messianic hope. 

To reject the prophetic integrity of the books written by the Hebrew prophets is to disregard this story which is like no other. To reject the story of the Hebrews and the Jews is to disregard monotheism and how it has been conveyed. Who else but a sovereign God could see to it that hopelessness should be replaced by hope? Who else but a sovereign God could tell this story, which expands out from the Jews … and engulfs the whole world? Who else but a timeless God could promise life everlasting after physical death and make it the hope of the world?

Scholars who reject supernaturalism as it is evident in the story of the Hebrews and the Jews cannot see the forest for the trees. Men and women who study the Bible and demonstrate that they don’t know what they’re studying prove that they are not taking into account the whole story, the big picture, the inescapable truth that there is a something magnificent, something transcendent, something a whole lot bigger than they are which goes beyond which prophet wrote what, and when, and what he meant. If there is only one prophecy, JUST ONE, which demonstrates the timeless prowess of God by its fulfillment — that is enough, it should be enough. But the scholar who sees only with his eyes wants more.

In recent days I have taken up a study of the hypothesis of Deutero-Isaiah, being mindful as I have of a certain prophecy by Micah in which he names Bethlehem as a messianic birthplace, being mindful of the prophet Jeremiah’s foretelling of a “new thing” and that the Jewish exiles would only be captives of Babylon for 70 years before something happened to reverse the fortunes of the Jews in captivity, being mindful in Isaiah and the Psalms of messianic descriptions which fit one person in history, and I have come to realize how readily and easily we sabotage ourselves and our chances for amazement and awe, hope and happiness. I feel for those Bible scholars who cannot help but “what if” themselves into a lonely, darkened corner over a handful of points … when there is so much else to amaze them. As pertains to Deutero-Isaiah and whether one or two men named Isaiah wrote the book of Isaiah, I am caused to consider that we today are not so smart as we give ourselves credit for being, though we rarely admit that as time goes on we are, in truth, becoming less and less discerning, intelligent and wise. If those people who compiled the Hebrew scriptures from the 4th to the 2nd centuries did not see any need to label the book of Isaiah as being comprised of parts a, b and c, with each part having a different author, which surely they would have known, then I see no reason to place any confidence in the theories that occurred to a couple of Germans in the 19th century that there ought to be authorial distinctions made between chapters 1-39 and chapters 40-66 in the book of Isaiah, and, that some of the most striking prophecies contained in this book are the result of funny business, names inserted after the fact, such as the name Cyrus. Surely, holy things then before the common era were a lot more holy than they are now. Surely there were people when the Bible was being compiled who were in awe of what they were compiling and copying — perhaps inserting a name where it belonged, or perhaps not — so that there would have been a reverent approach to assembling a peerless collection of writings which were part of a much larger framework, a much larger story. Sadly, we are not so much in awe. And we become less so with each passing year — though we have so many other reasons than the Deutero-Isaiah hypothesis to instill it in us.

(AN EXCELLENT SITE ON THE SECOND HALF OF ISAIAH)

The Anti-Supernaturalism Evident in Higher Criticism

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Supernaturalism is a reality in our world — just as the presence of a sovereign God is a reality in our precisely balanced and wondrously driven physical world. It should not be uncommon then for us to find supernaturalism and divine sovereignty evident within the context of the Hebrew and Christian scriptures, at least not to the believer who rightly ascribes integrity to the Scriptures in all the right places. There are human errors evident in the Scriptures. There are gaps and omissions and passages which are highly suspect (for example Mark 16:9-20 and John 7:53-8:11). And there are unexplained oddities associated with the New Testament, such as the sum of the verses in the Gospel of Mark coming out precisely to 666. (A coincidence? Perhaps. But a striking one if it is, in view of our claim that John Mark may be the [obscured] writer of Revelation.) But both the Hebrew and the Christian scriptures are valid overall, notably in the theme of mankind’s redemption and salvation which runs throughout. The Scriptures’ uniformity as it pertains to the “chosenness” of the Jews, the narrative-oriented plan devised by God and the world’s reasoned hope for a Messiah is simply too strongly apparent.

There are higher critics of the Bible who have focused on the books of Isaiah and Daniel, finding within these works angles by which to discredit the prophetic integrity of both. But we answer these ideas by emphasizing the prophetic integrity found elsewhere in the Scriptures, within which critics cannot arguably find evidence of multiple authors who wrote false prophecy, which is the charge higher critics have made with regard to Isaiah and Daniel. In the case of chapters 40-66 in Isaiah, especially the Cyrus prophecies found in chapters 44 and 45, we disagree that a second Isaiah or Deutero-Isaiah writing during or after the exile is responsible for these notable utterances. We hold this view because of prophetic integrity found elsewhere in scripture, and, because Josephus confirms that Cyrus was shown these enduring prophecies upon his arrival in Babylon which impressed and reportedly influenced the wise and benevolent Persian leader. (Jeremiah’s 70-year prophecy regarding the exile’s precise duration would also have impressed Cyrus.) As for Daniel, the evidence is strong, despite the claims of critics on narrow grounds, that Daniel is prophetically reliable in all cases: 1) it was already revered as prophetic in the time in which some critics say it was written, 2) there would be no motivation for someone to write skillfully false prophecy for the purpose of inspiring a Jewish audience, and 3) the messianic predictions of Daniel pertaining to Jesus as Messiah are too precise — even numerically (regardless of whether they were written in the 6th or the 2nd century B.C.) — to disregard their integrity and apparent validity. And, of course, there are other reasons.

It must be continually pointed out to the higher critics that whatever they might say about the apparent human errors, gaps, repetitions, contradictions and too-good-to-be-true aspects arguably found in some scripture, there is simply too much profound weight to be attributed to the remainder of a unified, peerless body of work written by various authors who in many cases had no contact with one another not to give the Holy Scriptures the benefit of the doubt as divine and supernatural writings with a singular spiritual objective. There is too much artistry to be found in the Bible for it not to have been ultimately guided and inspired by a sovereign Creator. — rcg)

By Harold S. Martin

Many people don’t care who wrote the book of Isaiah (and think the matter is insignificant, as expressed by T.T. Myers in a Gospel Messenger article way back in 1910), but those who have studied theological issues know that the question “Who wrote the book of Isaiah?” is an important one. (We would add that  questions about “Who wrote the other prophetic books found in the Hebrew scriptures?” and “What prophetic integrity do they possess?” are also relevant, as they may be seen as validating the supernatural nature of these writings, including the book of Isaiah.)

For centuries, the church believed that the various books of the Bible were for the most part written by the authors whose names they bear, usually persons who were contemporary with the events they narrate. But in the 19th century, a discipline called “higher criticism” grew by such large proportions that scholars in Europe were captured by it, and today the findings of the higher critics are taught as assured fact in most mainline seminaries across the United States. This includes the instruction given at Bethany Seminary, the views of most curriculum writers for church school materials, and the assumptions behind most books recommended for reading in the Three Year Reading Course prescribed for licensed ministers. The critics believe that the Pentateuch is a patchwork of information supplied by at least four writers, that Isaiah must be partitioned into two or three parts — written by several men who used the name “Isaiah” — and they believe in a late date for the writing of the book of Daniel after many of the events described in the book had already occurred. (While there is plausible evidence that four writers wrote the Torah or Pentateuch, in our view, the books of Isaiah and Daniel, it can well be argued, are not superficially prophetic.)

It is our belief that multitudes of believers do not know what the historical-critical method of Bible study is. When the issue of “Biblical Inspiration and Authority” was being studied by an Annual Conference Committee in the late 1970s, a survey of believers’ views about the Bible was made. One of the questions on the survey was:

The use of the historical or critical method in studying the Bible:

a) Tends to exclude the supernatural from scripture;

b) Helps us understand the Bible more clearly;

c) Is the one and only legitimate way to study the Bible;

d) Is valuable for scholars, but not for lay persons.

The responses indicated a concern about the use of a critical method that seeks to exclude the supernatural from Scripture, but a sizable majority of the believers who completed the survey, believe the historical-critical method of Bible study improves understanding. However, it is likely that many who responded thought that the critical method was the older and more historic way of studying the Bible. But indeed the historical-critical method of Bible study is only a recent invention. And furthermore, it is doubtful that the 1978 survey reached an accurate cross-section of believers in our congregations. Thus it seems wise to take a closer look at the historical-critical method.

Wilbur Stover (pioneer Church of the Believers missionary to India), in his book, The Great First Work of the Church: Missions, says: “We have a good church; we have a good body of doctrine; we are not much worried with the evil influence … of higher criticism.” That statement printed in 1922 is of course no longer true. Believers today have embraced “the evil influence of higher criticism.” And thus we believe it is appropriate during these months when many are studying the book of Isaiah in Sunday School classes, to look more carefully at the concept of higher criticism, and more specifically at the question, “The Book of Isaiah — Who Wrote It?” The real issue in our churches today centers around the matter of whether or not the message of the Bible is an accurately recorded supernatural revelation from God.

The Fallacy of Higher Criticism 

The theological disarray in the church today has not come upon us suddenly. It is the result of forces which have been at work for several generations. The fruit of these forces is only becoming more and more evident in our present generation.

The chief culprit behind the departures from the faith that are being witnessed in most mainline denominations today is a discipline known as the historical-critical method of Bible study. The historical-critical approach is supposed to improve one’s understanding of Scripture, but it has actually been employed to bring the Bible into disrepute. Those who advocate the historical-critical method say:

1) The Pentateuch is composed of four basic documents (labeled J,E,D,P) the last of which was compiled only after the Exile in Jeremiah’s day.

2) The accounts in Genesis 1-11 are “myths” (that is, stories that communicate universal truths, but are not themselves historical and geographical realities).

3) The book of Isaiah was written by two or three different writers, each widely separated in time. 

4) The recorded experience of Jonah is intended to be an allegory, not a reality. The important thing is to get the religious truth behind the story. 

5) The Gospels are the recollections of early church leaders, and the words attributed to Jesus may never have been uttered the way they are recorded.

The word “criticism” and related words (like “critic” and “criticize”) are usually understood as referring to something negative or unpleasant. Thus to the average person, to “criticize” is to “find fault,” and “criticism” is to “pass unfavorable judgment on the qualities of some person or thing.” However, the root word from which the words “critic” and “criticism” and “criticize” are derived is the Greek word “krites” which speaks of a “judge.” And a true judge is one who is fair and impartial and who will sway neither to the right nor to the left. His decision will as much as possible be guided purely by the facts of the case.

In theology, “criticism” may be defined as a serious and scholarly study of the books of the Bible especially with regard to the date when the text was written, who the writer was, under what circumstances each book was written, and what the writings meant to the persons who first read them. When we speak of the historical-critical method of Bible study, we are speaking theoretically of a careful and objective study of the books that comprise the Bible. Those who use the historical-critical method are called “higher critics.” They use various methods known as “form criticism,” “redaction criticism,” and “literary criticism.” We do not have space in this brief essay to describe the characteristics of each method.

The discipline of higher criticism could be a valuable tool in Bible study, but the higher critics for the most part start with the assumption that the Bible is a record of human encounter with God through long centuries, and not with the belief that the Bible is an infallible book written under the careful supervision of the Holy Spirit. Thus the Bible (to the critics) bears the scars of human error. Nevertheless, they believe it is a record which testifies to the message of God’s love for all people.

Higher criticism over the years has tended to explain the Scriptures and their origin in terms that can be “reasoned” out. The exclusion of the supernatural seems to be one of the main postulates of the higher critics. The modern biblical critic works on the basis of one or more of the following assumptions:

a) Miracles and genuine prophecies do not occur. Thus, for example, portions of Isaiah are attributed to a “second” or “third” Isaiah who wrote the words of certain specific (supposedly) prophetic passages after the events had occurred.

b) Biblical material involves internal contradictions. Thus, the discovery of occasional (seeming) contradictions in the text become the prime reason why the critics assign a multiple authorship to the Pentateuch. The text is sometimes confusing and hard to decipher because some of the Pentateuch was written by a “priestly” writer and some by a “deuteronomist” writer, etc.

c) Bible editors often came long after the events described. The writers of Scripture were mere editors (“redactors”) of the materials which they picked up from various sources. Oral tradition, as it passed from generation to generation, took various forms (proverbs, miracle stories, exhortations, etc.) The writers compiled their books from these various oral traditions.

To use the methods of the higher critics is to subject the Bible to human reason and to common sense. The absolute accuracy of the Bible was generally held by all Christians for the first 1800 years of church history. Only during the past two centuries, with the rise of higher criticism, has the infallibility of the Bible been seriously called into question by leading spokesmen within the church. Pastors and Bible teachers are taught the methods of higher critics in seminary, and this is the major reason for the great gulf between institutional church leaders and the average church member in the pew.

There are some very serious consequences that result from embracing the views of the higher critics. Such “scholars” say that the Bible is not historically accurate, but it is filled with beautiful religious lessons. For example, a writer in a Sunday School quarterly dealing with Moses and the burning bush, says:

“It really doesn’t make any difference what the ‘flame’ on the mountainside was. Moses saw something bright that day. Whether it was a ray of sunlight or a volcanic flame, or a bush in blossom is not Important. What matters is that Moses heard a voice.”

The modern scholars hold the Bible to be historically false, but religiously true. The jewels of the Christian faith, they say, are found in a book that is marred and imperfect. They say that it doesn’t matter if the Bible is accurate or not, as long as we get the intended religious lesson. But our response is this: If the Bible is not entirely accurate about Jonah (and his being swallowed by a big fish), then it may not be entirely accurate about Jesus (and His vicarious shedding of blood on the Cross). How can anyone trained on a steady diet of historical-critical theories — walk into the pulpits of our churches with a clear “Thus saith the Lord”?

The historical-critical method of Bible study indirectly implies that until 200 years ago no one really understood the Bible, but now in these modern times, with the skills of the historical scholars, we are getting behind the inaccurate shells of the Bible “stories” and finding the truth which has been concealed from past generations. We will illustrate the dangerous results of embracing the views of the higher critics by looking at the issue of who wrote the book of Isaiah. 

The Book of Isaiah — Who Wrote It? 

Isaiah was perhaps the greatest of the writing prophets. He carried on his ministry in Judah during the reigns of several kings. The Israelites, we remember, were ruled as a united kingdom under Saul, David, and Solomon. But at the time of Solomon’s death, the kingdom was divided and usually designated “Israel” (northern tribes), and “Judah” (southern tribes). Some of the kings in Judah were loyal servants of God, and thus the southern kingdom survived for more than a ‘century after the northern kingdom had been overrun by the Assyrians.

Isaiah received his prophetic call about 740 B.C., the year King Uzziah died. Isaiah was born during days of prosperity in the southern kingdom. Judah was regaining economic strength under the competent leadership of Uzziah. The previous foolish policies of Amaziah had made Judah subject to invasion and oppression by Israel from the North. And the moral looseness of the people (Isaiah 1:4-6) was going to lead to punishment for Judah later on. The Assyrians were already making threats against Judah. Even during Isaiah’s ministry, the Assyrians had taken the northern kingdom of Israel (722 B.C.). Isaiah the prophet spoke of Judah’s future captivity also. We know from subsequent historical events that Judah was later taken captive by the Babylonian armies.

1. THE BACKGROUND AND MESSAGE OF ISAIAH

The book of Isaiah can easily be divided into two parts. In chapters 1-39, Isaiah writes about his own time. This was the period when Assyria was a threat to Judah. In chapters 40-66, the Prophet sees beyond his own time to the period of the Babylonian Captivity. Isaiah seeks through his messages to bring comfort and hope to a crushed nation. (We should note also that Isaiah not only saw 100 to 150 years beyond his own time [to the Babylonian Captivity]. He also looked forward 700 years, prophesying the virgin birth of Christ [Isaiah 7:14], and describing the suffering and death of the Messiah [Isaiah 53:1-12; Acts 8:32-35]).

The basic theme of Isaiah’s message is that salvation is bestowed only by grace (by the power of God the Redeemer), rather than by human strength or by the good works of the flesh. Isaiah sets forth the doctrine of Christ the Redeemer in such full detail that he is sometimes called “the evangelical prophet.” The holy God will not permit continuing uncleanness in His covenant people, and therefore will chasten them to make them fit to participate in His program of redemption. The great lesson emphasized in Isaiah is the basic principle that any nation or any individual exalting himself above God will sooner or later be dethroned by the Lord of hosts.

The last 27 chapters of Isaiah predict the fall of Jerusalem and the 70 Years of Captivity. Isaiah foresaw the coming invasion by the Babylonian armies, and so the final 27 chapters of Isaiah contain words of comfort for the exiled people of Judah. And furthermore, Isaiah foresaw the rise of Cyrus the Great (who captured Babylon in 539 B.C.) and then gave permission to the Jewish exiles to return to their homeland. But not only was the work of Cyrus foreseen. Cyrus is actually referred to by name in Isaiah 44:28 and in Isaiah 45:1.

If the Bible is primarily of human origin, then the only way to explain these apparently successful predictions of Isaiah - is to say that they were written after the fulfillment had taken place, or at least when it was about to occur. Scholars who have anti-supernatural convictions do not believe that the Isaiah of B.C. 700 exhibited a foreknowledge of events that were to happen more than a hundred years after his death and so they flatly declare that another Isaiah (who lived much later than Isaiah the son of Amoz) must have written the last part of the book of Isaiah.

2. THE CRITICS AND ISAIAH’S AUTHORSHIP

For nearly twenty-five centuries, no one dreamed of doubting that Isaiah the son of Amoz (who lived in the 8th Century B.C.) was the author of the whole book that goes under his name. The literary unity of Isaiah was not doubted until comparatively recent times. There is no evidence that the ancients who lived a few hundred years after Isaiah’s time knew of any problems In connection with Isaiah’s writings. Even the translators or the Septuagint translation (approx. B. C. 200) showed no signs of believing that the 66 chapters of Isaiah are not Isaiah’s work. Nor do the copyists of the text of Isaiah seem to know any other author except Isaiah the son of Amoz.

Among the first to doubt the unity of Isaiah was Ibn Ezra, who lived in the 12th Century A. D. Not much was said about it again until the 18th Century, when the ,higher critics began delving into their work. One scholar says this chapter could not have been Isaiah’s writing, and another says this verse could not have come from Isaiah’s pen, and so forth. And so they say there must have been two (or perhaps three) Isaiahs (a Deutero-Isaiah). Since the late 1800s the negative critics have become more vocal than ever.

The primary reason why the critics declare that the work of Isaiah is the work of at least two writers is because they believe a prophet could not see beyond the horizon of his own time. It would be impossible for Isaiah (living about B. C. 700) to speak of Cyrus who lived about B. C. 540. Consequently, Isaiah 44:28 and Isaiah 45:1 are dated much later than B. C. 700, and are said to have been written after the time of Cyrus by a writer who used the name “Isaiah” as a pen-name. The “scholarly” critics proceed from the assumption that prediction of the distant future is impossible. They do not believe it was possible for Isaiah to speak of a distant Babylonian Captivity and of Cyrus as the deliverer from the Captivity. Therefore the higher critics say these sections of the book of Isaiah must have been written after the events actually occurred, and then they were made to appear as if they were predictive prophecies.

The International Journal of Religious Education, February, 1963, published by the NCC, says: “Isaiah of Jerusalem, who lived in the eighth century B. C., did not write all of the book that bears his name. Many chapters (chapters 40-66) were written by an unknown Jewish exile in Babylon during the sixth century B. C. The references to King Uzziah (6:1) and Ahaz (7:1) help to date Isaiah of Jerusalem, and the name of King Cyrus of Persia (45:1) helps to date the writer of the Exile.”

The Church of the Believers A Guide for Biblical Studies, December, 1983, January, February, 1984, says: “The book of Isaiah is very complex, a whole library of prophetic work spanning centuries of time. Chapters 1-39 are attributed to Isaiah, son of Amoz who lived in Jerusalem during the second half of the eighth century BCE. Chapters 40-55 are set in the Babylonian exile after the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE. Chapters 56-66 reflect a later time when attempts were being made to re-establish the life of a Jewish community in Jerusalem. We know next to nothing about the different writers of the book of Isaiah. We do know that they could deliver God’s message to the people as each successive crisis demanded” (page 65).

The paragraphs cited above are only a few of the multitudes of similar statements which are made time and time again in our literature. They indicate that the theories of the higher critics have become very deeply entrenched in the minds of most pastors and writers trained in the more liberal schools of theology.

3. THE RETORT AND EVANGELICAL RESPONSE

The advocates of the Second Isaiah theory stoutly affirm that at least two different persons wrote the book of Isaiah. Yet the New Testament writers clearly regard the author of the entire book of Isaiah to be one and the same person. It is true that some of the New Testament quotations can be interpreted as referring to the book merely according to its traditional title (that is, simply from Isaiah, regardless of who the author was) - but there are other New Testament references which clearly imply the personality of the historic Isaiah himself. Notice Matthew 12:17-18, Matthew 3:3, and Luke 3:4.

But the most conclusive New Testament citation is John 12:38-41. Verse 40 quotes Isaiah 6:9-10 (from the first section of the book of Isaiah). Verse 38 quotes Isaiah 53:1 (from the last section of the book of Isaiah). And then the inspired Apostle John comments in verse 41: “These things said Isaiah, when he saw his glory, and spoke of him.” Obviously it was the same Isaiah who personally beheld the glory of Christ in the temple-vision of Isaiah 6, as the Isaiah who also spoke of Christ in Isaiah 53:1. If it was not the same writer who composed both chapter 6 and chapter 53 (of the book of Isaiah), then the New Testament writer must have been in error! It therefore follows that those who advocate “the two Isaiah theory” must by implication concede the existence of errors in the New Testament, and this is a very serious matter. The historical-critical view undermines belief in the full-orbed truth of the Bible.

As we have just seen, Jesus quoted from both parts of the book and attributed His quotations to Isaiah. Other New Testament writers quoted from both parts of the book without any kind of distinction. The phrase “the Holy One of Israel” is found an almost equal number of times in both sections (12 times in chapters 1-39 and 13 times in chapters 40-66). The oldest known manuscript of Isaiah (one of the Dead Sea Scrolls which springs from the 2nd Century B. C.) links the two sections as one unit.

And so the answer to the question, “What difference does it make who wrote the book of Isaiah?” — is of tremendous importance. Either Jesus told a deliberate lie, or He was ignorant of the fact that Isaiah did not write what He quoted, or He accommodated himself to those who accept the Isaianic tradition even though He knew better. We believe that the affirmation of Jesus concerning the authorship of Isaiah is to be accepted, and that the theories of the scholars who deny it are to be rejected. The issues at stake are considerable. They will not vanish away. The historical-critical method of viewing the Bible is the great enemy of the evangelical faith. How one looks at the Scriptures will make a difference in his lifestyle now and will affect his eternal destiny.
 
  

Could All Three Disciples Named John Have Been Martyred?

If all three of the men named John in the Gospels — the apostle John, John the Baptist and John Mark — were martyred, which man named John lived to write Revelation?

We know John the Baptist was beheaded. Jesus told the apostle John that he and his brother James would drink from the same cup as Jesus, suggesting martyrdom lied ahead for the brothers in the minds of some scholars. James, the brother of John, was beheaded by Herod. Early church patriarch Papias reports that the apostle John was martyred “by the Jews at an early date.”

According to church tradition, John Mark is believed to have been martyred in Alexandria, Egypt by being tied to a rope and drug through the streets of Alexandria.

So which man named John lived to an old age to the end of the 1st century, when most scholars believe that Revelation was written by a man who identifies himself as John?

Tantalizingly, Jesus suggests that there was a man presumably named John who would not taste death, and this would be the Beloved Disciple, “the other disciple, the one Jesus loved,” who on the testimony of church patriarch Irenaeus may have been the man John who wrote the Gospel of John and likely lived on to write Revelation. 

If we take into account this scene in the final chapter of John’s Gospel when Jesus suggests to Peter that a man presumably named John will not taste death — therefore making him eligible to write Revelation toward the end of the 1st century — we may conclude by the somewhat impersonal way in which Peter refers to “this man” presumably named John that Peter does not know him very well. Peter, having heard rumors that one disciple of Jesus will not die, looks back behind him as he is walking with Jesus in this scene, sees a man presumably named John and impersonally asks Jesus, “What about this man?”

If Peter was referring to his friend John, the son of Zebedee, i.e. the apostle John, would he have used the impersonal identifier “this man” within earshot of his fishing partner to ask Jesus whether John was the one disciple apparently rumored to be the one disciple who would not die? And, if “this man” was the apostle John, is it likely that he would have been chosen above his brother James to live while James went on to be martyred as James was just as Jesus had arguably predicted?

If all of the men named John in the Gospels were martyred, which disciple and follower of Jesus named John lived to the end of the 1st century to write Revelation? The only conclusion that we can come to is that either the tradition which says the apostle John was martyred or the tradition that says John Mark was martyred … is false. Or, there is another disciple of Jesus named John somewhere who wrote the Gospel of John and Revelation, which is not likely. 

Is one of these accounts of martyrdom wrong, false? If so, which one is false? Which disciple named John was not martyred, though we’re told that all of the disciples named John in the Gospels were martyred?

Why would someone lie and say that a disciple of Jesus named John died a martyr when he might not have been put to death, when not all of the disciples named John in the Gospels could have died as martyrs?

We either have a serious misrepresentation of the truth, a very significant fabrication, an important error on our hands … or we must come up with another disciple of Jesus named John to be the man who lived to write Revelation.

If there has been deceit pertaining to a disciple named John and his martyrdom, are there other areas where deceit has been used to obscure from us the identity of the Beloved Disciple and the writer of the fourth Gospel and Revelation?