R. M. Jurjevich

A GOOD, BUT INCOMPLETE BOOK ON ANTI-CHRISTIAN CONSPIRACY

Pastor Tim LaHaye, The Battle for the Family, Old Tappan, N J. USA, Revel Co., 1982

In the short working span I have now in a day, I decided to get acquainted with a book, which we would eventually translate into Serbian as part of our publishing effort on uncovering the anti-Christian conspiracy. I read through a larger part of the book and found it to be a worthwhile contribution to clarifying "humanism" as a basic anti-Christian conspiracy against the Church, culture and morality. Yet something was, in my judgment, missing in this and most other books on this subject: The book avoided mentioning the Jewish role in the present falling away from Christianity. Were that role minor, I would not object to such a reticence on the Jewish enmity to Christianity. Yet, I have written on the Judaic conspiracy extensively. That is why I missed badly in Pastor LaHaye's book that aspect of the decline of Christian cultural influence in the last four centuries, He, as a Christian pastor and activist, should know the importance of the Judaizing role of the Cabbala-inspired sects of pantheism, deism, Satanism, alchemy, Freemasonry, secular humanism, godless socialism, bloody Communism, Adventism, Jehova's Witnesses and others. Judaizing views are particularly involved in politically Leftist trends. We are talking about a tremendously important infusion of Jewish nation all the "reforms" in social, democratic and national practices of religion and morality. Christianity is being drowned in the Jewish-inspired ideology.

Among the millions of obedient servants of people scared to recognize even the traces of Jewish dominance of our culture, the ostensible ministers and priests of Christ play a significant role. They are in that phase of the early Christian disciples who hid behind the closed doors in Jerusalem dominated by the Sadducees and Pharisees who had just murdered the Lord Jesus Christ.

They, of course, play that low game with dignity, refusing to challenge the media and the "public opinion," and showing themselves as no "anti-Semites," whatever were their true feelings and beliefs. Pastor Jack More, a former general in the U.S. Army, tells of his experiences with the Southern Baptist ministers, after he began to criticize Jews, as the chief supporters of Communism and liberalism. As a former prisoner of the Communists who almost killed him, in South Korea and an outspoken patriot and anti-Leftist, more was a popular speaker in churches and colleges on the Bolshevik threat to the freedom of Americans.

Being an honest and upright man, more began to speak about the source of Communist power, the Jewish bankers and businessmen. A normal thinking Christian would expect that such revelations would be welcome to American Christians, particularly the enlightened ministers and priests. Unfortunately the opposite was the case. His fellow ministers began to show a negative attitude toward him; some even would cross the street in order not to speak to him. The invitations to speak in their churches dwindled to practically nothing. The ministers showed themselves the most compliant servants to the Jewish control of the American "public opinion". Anathema on such Christians.

Pastor LaHaye, otherwise a successful worker against the secularist dominance of American private and public life, is no different regarding the Jewish controls over the secularization and de-Christianization of American minds than 99.9% of American preachers: They respect the taboo forbidding the uncovering of the dismal Jewish role in American private and political life, morality and ideological matters.

Pastor LaHaye appears well grounded in his refusal of mentioning the Jews as the principal poisoners of American liberalism and Leftism. As I read further, I came upon a classic instance of the FOJS (Fear of the Jews Syndrome).

Pastor LaHaye wrote well and effectively on the Leftist bias of the American media, discussing the consistently anti-Christian attitude of three main "American" television channels.

The Anti-Christian Bias of the Media

A classic illustration of the media bias occurred in April 1980. In response to a call for a day of prayer, 300,000 Christians marched on Washington, D.C. Except for the 1 million who appeared on the mall during the 1967 bicentennial celebration that was the largest crowd in our nation's history. (The Christians even left the city cleaner than when they arrived, by carrying small plastic bags and picking up the debris.) One would think that such a record-breaking march on our nation's capital was news, but the papers didn't. To my knowledge, it was not carried on one front page in the country! In fact, many didn't even mention it, and those that did limited it to back-page trivia. Even TV blocked it out of the evening news.

Just three weeks later, fewer than 3.000 lesbians marched on Washington. The event hit the front page of every paper in the country and was carried on the evening TV news. Why? Our liberal humanist reporters and media controllers think more of 3,000 lesbians than they do of 300,000 Christians. Ironically, of course, this country was founded and made successful by Christians, not lesbians. But normalizing lesbianism by putting it on the front page is more within the interest span of our amoral humanist editors than advertising a public act of worship by Christians.

After watching this kind of news discrimination for half a century, I have come to expect it. But even I was not prepared for the media attacks on the Moral Majority that occurred during and after the 1980 elections. Was it really possible, I wondered, that peace-loving, morality-advocating ministers of the Gospel like Dr. Jerry Falwell could be compared to Adolph Hitler and Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini? If ever there was a distortion of the truth, it was the oft-repeated comparison of the "new religious right" with the Nazi party coming to power in Germany during the 30s. But to a hysterical humanist editor, terrified at the thought that his favored humanistic senators (who voted consistently for socialism and against free enterprise, who favored abortion and every other anti-moral stand of humanism) could not withstand conservative opposition, it seemed a fitting outburst.

A good illustration of their warped reporting appeared on the front page of a Los Angeles paper, three days after the election. Dr. Falwell was pictured together with the acknowledgment that the Moral Majority and other groups, such as the Religious Round-table, Christian Voice, and Concerned Women for America, were largely responsible for the landslide victory that not only put Governor Ronal Reagan in the White House but swept ten conservative senators and thirty-three congressmen into office and retired an equal number of liberals. After making that reluctant confession, they proceeded to ask "religious leaders" what they thought of the emergence of the Moral Majority. Guess who they asked? Two liberal humanist ministers of the totally discredited National Council of Churches of Christ, a Unitarian minister, and a liberal Catholic priest. Why didn't they ask one of the pastors of the large, growing churches in California, any one of whom is influential to more people than all of those they interviewed put together? The predictable tactic of our biased press is to bring up a subject, then interview only those who agree with their humanist point of view. The media will dignify their opinions in the press and on TV as if they were the authorities, when in reality they are out of step with the people.

Every time I am invited to debate or participate on a TV program, the result is the same: The host and all the other guests appear in opposition to me or my position. Once when I participated in a sex-education panel discussion, I found the moderator and seven other panelists on one side, me on the other. So much for the fairness doctrine and objectivity!

(pp. 122, 123)

Pastor goes on giving a telling expose on the anti-Christian bias of the media. He mentions the anti-patriotic role of the media in Viet Nam war and manipulations against the patriotic, conservative point of view. There is a section on "CBS and the Jim Jones Whitewash/' and another on "The Media is Antifamily," and "The Power of the Media/' yet nowhere does he bring out the basic explanation: The Media reflect the biases of the Jewish Rulers of the US!

This must have been a deliberate choice of Pastor LaHaye. For years before, the genuine American nationalists have been protesting the anti-American biases of the power-wielders in Washington, the Jewish clique! All three major networks are headed by ethnic Jews. Pastor LaHaye deliberately avoids mentioning Jews where they are too obvious to be overlooked. With leaders dominated by such a powerful FOJS, the Jews can rule America and the world a thousand years.