In the on-going debate between so-called "Creationists" and "Evolutionists," evangelical Christians are being duped into siding with "Creationists" (and/or proponents of "Creative Design") over and against "Evolutionists," believing that in doing so they are taking God's side against the forces of atheistic secular-humanism. [Please see our article, "DOGS ON A LEASH: Blacks and Latinos are being targeted; they had better wake up and smell the coffee."]
How far advanced this alliance has "evolved" (so to speak) was made plain in a recent article that appeared in the liberal magazine, The Nation. The article labeled Ronald L. Numbers' apologetic work, The Creationists: From Scientific Creationism to Intelligent Design –
"A great reference work; a classic text, now updated and expanded to take into account the latest trends among anti-evolutionists; Numbers' carefully researched history is required reading to understand the current controversy. It is a welcome addition to the burgeoning scholarship on contemporary interactions between science and religion."
Now, one must be careful here: it isn't as if the Nation has suddenly "found religion;" it's the fact that Numbers approvingly linked "Creationism" (and/or "Intelligence Design") with the epic work by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray, The Bell Curve.
BY DOING SO, NUMBERS IS ARTFULLY INDUCING CHRISTIAN EVANGELICALS TO TAKE SIDES WITH THE NAZIS AND THE APOLOGISTS OF EUGENICS. AND ONE SHOULD NOT THINK - EVEN FOR A SECOND - THAT IF HE EMBRACES EVEN TANGENTIALLY THIS KIND OF THINKING HE WILL BE ABLE TO ESCAPE THE SAME DISGUSTING SHAME WHICH HAS HAUNTED GERMAN CHRISTIANS FOR THE LAST EIGHTY YEARS.
Most American Christians would recoil at the thought that they would ever embrace the eugenic policies of Nazi Germany, and would hold up to ridicule those who would think otherwise. But the way to hell is not transversed in one giant step, but little step by little step; each step leading to another, until one finds himself eventually at the door to hell.
THE FIRST STEP ALONG THIS PATH FOR MANY CHRISTIANS MAY WELL LIE IN THEIR REFUSAL TO TAKE SERIOUSLY THAT – IN THEIR EFFORT TO "STAND FOR GOD" WHILE AT THE SAME TIME APPEARING NOT TO BE NINCOMPOOPS – THEY HAVE TAKEN THE FIRST STEP ON THE PATH TO HELL BY EMBRACING THE EUGENICS WHICH HIDE BEHIND THE SCIENCE (SO-CALLED) OF "INTELLIGENCE DESIGN."
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness." (1 Cor. 3:19)
To recount, in their provocative and shrewdly crafted 1994 book on intelligence and American society, The Bell Curve, Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray contend that the key to explaining much of this country's inequality - and most of the social problems that result from it - is economic stratification by a unitary entity called intelligence or "cognitive ability" as measured by I.Q.
Christopher Caldwell, reporting in The American Spectator, a conservative magazine popular with politically motivated Christian evangelicals, writes,
"The central argument of The Bell Curve is that intelligence is important to success; and emerging technologies and global trade make brain power more important than ever. Society's institutions - universities, businesses, governments - are selecting the brain-workers they need with increasing accuracy, and compensating them with increasing largesse. The probable result: a growing identification of native intelligence with socioeconomic standing, a widening gap between rich and poor, and a stratification of America into intellectual castes, with a few hi-tech communications wizards living in privately policed suburbs and a horde of unskilled Calibans trapped in rotting cities and rural areas."
Caldwell glibly reports, however, that such a conclusion is not really new - that liberals like former Labor Secretary Robert Reich (The Work of Nations) and Mickey Kaus (The End of Equality) have been saying essentially the same thing for years.
What's new is that Herrnstein and Murray introduce race into the equation essentially in two of the book's twenty-two chapters (specifically, chapters thirteen and fourteen), although the subject pops up again in Part IV (chapters seventeen through twenty-two).
Caldwell slyly asks,
"Why was it okay for Reich and Kaus to claim such an outrage for Herrnstein and Murray?"
The answer, as anyone who has followed the controversy knows, is a second conclusion of The Bell Curve: that the (growing) intellectual stratification ... has a racial dimension.
"There are measurable intelligence differences between the races that education can narrow only slightly, if at all. The lumpen class the authors envision will be disproportionately black and Latino, while there will be ... [a disproportionate share of] whites ... among the symbolic analysts."
Herrnstein and Murray start with some general propositions about intelligence:
In addition, the authors make what they think is an important concession which they believe goes a long way in mitigating any charges of racism by "liberal authorities:" intelligence is not an all- determining factor governing the success or failure of any one given individual - that other factors (like ambition, drive, hard work, environment, etc.) play important roles. Nonetheless, they contend that predictable behavioral patterns do emerge when one studies I.Q. across large population groups.
Such a group has been made available by the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), a federally funded study of 12,686 students who were age 14 to 22 in 1979, and have been followed ever since. The authors rely heavily on this study, which records I.Q., socioeconomic status, occupation, income level, criminal behavior, and other traits - and they cross-reference dozens of other studies done in the last thirty years.
To explain: when one charts people along an axis by intelligence, the resulting distribution is a "bell curve" - a statistical curve which gives its name to the book - with the vast majority of people stacking up in the middle range, and the remainder on two slopes at each end of the curve - one with significantly dumber individuals (the left slope), and one with significantly smarter people (the right slope).
Using "standard deviation" - a measurement of probability - Murray and Herrnstein separate this curve into five groups determined by I.Q. percentile: very dull (0 to 5th percentile), dull (6th to 25th percentile), normal (26th to 75th percentile), bright (76th to 95th percentile), and very bright (96th to 100th percentile). It is among the very few people who inhabit the respective ends of the curve that the "predictive power of I.Q." becomes problematic for policy. Herrnstein and Murray believe that I.Q. has momentous implications for human behavior. For example, starting at the smart end, they supply statistical ammunition to Mickey Kaus' thesis as annunciated in his book The End of Multiculturalism that American society is being pulled centrifugally into castes by intellect. This sorting, they contend, begins initially in the elementary and secondary school systems and continues through the university system where the dullards are gradually (and mercilessly) weeded out; then it carries on into the job market where the bright are directed into a narrow range of high-intellect professions, where I.Q. averages 117.
At the other end of the bell curve - at the stupid end - are bunched in disproportionate numbers the poor, the violent, the dishonest, and the irresponsible.
This data, the authors suggest, leads one to the inevitable conclusion that America is gradually developing two societies - one which is full of bright, high-achievers; the other full of the dull, the violent, and the economically dependent (and one that has been made that way largely as the result of their inherited intelligence (I.Q.). It's an underclass which has a substantial and relatively independent role in creating its own, very dangerous pathology.
Herrnstein and Murray write,
"The underclass [ie., those on the left side of the bell curve] will become even more concentrated spatially than it is today. The expanded network of day care centers, homeless shelters, public housing, and other services will always be located in the poorest part of the inner city, which means that anyone who wants access to them will have to live there.
Herrnstein and Murray continue,
"The gaping cultural gap between the habits of the underclass and the habits of the rest of society ... will make it increasingly difficult for children who have grown up in the inner city to function in the larger society even when they want to."
Herrnstein and Murray warned that if the conditions which were even then dividing the country into cognitive caste systems were not alleviated, an explosion would surely result - an explosion that will manifest itself in race warfare - and that this will occur largely because people have fixated on the perceived racial dimension of the underclass; that is, because it's largely black and Latino. They warned at the time that -
"Racism will reemerge in a new and more virulent form. The tension between what the white elite is supposed to think and what it is actually thinking about race will reach something close to a breaking point. [Please see our article, "DAVID DUKE: Whether We Like It Or Not, A Lot Of People Are Beginning To Listen If Only In Secret."]
Herrnstein and Murray continued:
"This pessimistic prognosis must be contemplated: when the break comes, the result, as so often happens when cognitive dissonance is resolved, will be an overreaction in the other direction. Instead of the candor and realism about race that is so urgently needed, the nation will be faced with racial divisiveness and hostility that is as great as, or greater, than America experienced before the civil rights movement."
The authors went on to say,
"We realize how outlandish it (may) seem to predict that educated and influential (white) Americans, who have been so puritanical about racial conversation, will openly revert to racism, nonetheless, we believe it is worth worrying about) ... [We think that] it is more than just possible. [please see The End of Multiculturalism, pg. 4]
"If it were to happen [ie., if a custodial state would develop] ... it would be more unpleasant - more vicious - than anyone can now imagine ... by 'custodial state' we have in mind a high-tech and more lavish version of the Indian reservation for some substantial minority of the nation's population, while the rest of America tries to go about its business ... To some extent, we are not even really projecting, but reporting."
This, at last, brings us to the matter of dysgenesis - defined as the social process that leads to a decline in the genetic quality of a society; according to Caldwell, the authors' most depressing observation is this: Americans, taken as a whole, are getting dumber, since lower-intellect individuals - of all races - are having babies earlier and more frequently than their more intelligent contemporaries. Caldwell writes,
"As this book [ie., the Bell Curve] went to press, the average I.Q. of mothers in the NLSY was 95.7. The authors speculate ... that immigrants now coming to the U.S. may (also) have lower I.Q.s than the norm ... To warn of the dangers of even minor dysgenesis, the authors show the hypothetical behavioral fallout of a 3-point drop in the mean of the NLSY would translate into:
As a result, America must return to the status quo ante of the Great Society - reducing, or even eliminating, AFDC to take away the incentive for the production of a raft of low-I.Q. babies.
But what if that is not sufficient to bring the gene pool up to snuff? There is, of course, the Nazi solution of Dysgenesis. Caldwell writes,
"There will surely be some to argue, Why stop there? Doesn't sterilization of criminals, with their average I.Q. of 84, provide the chance to kill two birds with one stone?"
"Of all the uncomfortable topics we have explored ... (one) of the most uncomfortable ones ... [is] that a society with a higher mean I.Q. is also likely to be a society with fewer social ills and brighter economic prospects, and that the most efficient way to raise the I.Q. of a society is for smarter women to have higher birth rates. Instead, America is going in the opposite direction (i.e., dumber women are having babies in disproportionate numbers), and the implication is a future America with more social ills and gloomier economic prospects.
"... the existence of [any] differences [between individuals] must be discussed gingerly, when they are human differences. [But when] ... the differences are associated with membership in a group, censorship arises."
They bitingly write:
"Discrimination, once a useful word with a praiseworthy meaning, is now almost always used in a pejorative sense. Racism, sexism, ageism, elitism - all are in common parlance, and their meanings continue to spread, blotting out more and more semantic territory ... Mainstream political figures have found that their allegiance to the rhetoric of equality must expand very far indeed, for a single careless remark can irretrievably damage or even end a public career.
"In everyday life, the ideology of equality censors straitjackets everything from pedagogy to humor. The ideology of equality has stunted the range of moral dialogue to triviality. In daily life - conversations, the lessons taught in public schools, the kinds of screenplays or newspaper feature stories that people choose to write - the moral ascendancy of equality has made it difficult to use concepts such as virtue, excellence, beauty and - above all - truth."
And there's more! - there is something greater and more ominous lurking behind Herrnstein and Murray's apparent anxiety.
"We are silent here ... [also] because we are as apprehensive as most other people about what might happen when a government decides to social-engineer who has babies and who doesn't."
What exactly are Herrnstein and Murray talking about here? - clearly, they're talking about EUGENICS - defined as "a political strategy" denoting some sort of social control - or "social-engineering," as they call it - over human reproduction; specifically, the effort to "improve" the hereditary substrata of a given population through the promotion of public policies designed to encourage the reproduction of genetically superior groups ("positive eugenics"), and the concomitant effort to fabricate methods designed to prevent genetically inferior groups from having children ("negative eugenics").
Herrnstein and Murray continue:
"... clearly a society with a higher mean I.Q. is also likely to be a society with fewer social ills and brighter economic prospects ..."
To reverse the fact that poor blacks and Hispanics
are swamping the country with "dumb babies,
they say that the least those who recognize what is occurring should end those government programs that encourage the poor to have high birth rates. They write,
"... this highlights the problem: the United States already has policies that inadvertently social-engineer who has babies (through programs like the Food Stamp program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, etc.), and it is encouraging the wrong women."
And this is precisely the reason that Republicans under Trump want to eliminate these programs. And while most Christians would never admit it, this is exactly the reason that most Euro-centric, white Christians also want to end them.
Herrnstein and Murray explain:
"The technically precise description of America's fertility policy (ie., its "reverse eugenics" or dysgenesis policy) is that it subsidizes births among poor women, who are also disproportionately at the low end of the intelligence distribution. We urge generally that these policies, represented by the extensive network of cash and services for low-income women who have babies, be ended."
The Bell Curve has been so widely acclaimed in conservative Christian circles as an explanation for black and Latino under achievement that the editorial staff at Christianity Today found it necessary to warn its readers to be careful about doing so.
The warning appeared in an editorial in the December 12th (1994) issue entitled "For Whom the Bell Curves." The editorial reads,
"The authors' [Herrnstein and Murray's] conservatism may give The Bell Curve a stronger than usual hearing among ... evangelicals, but ... the implications of their findings ought to raise serious concern ... [Christians will] use The Bell Curve to reinforce stereotypes of blacks [and Latinos] ..."
Nonetheless, the evangelical community's secular right-wing allies have been urging evangelicals to ignore such warnings as "fuzzy-headed:" facts are facts, they say, and if blacks, Latinos and other minorities are not the intellectual equals of whites, we'll just have to learn to live with it. After all, God is sovereign, and possibly - just possibly - we, as white Christians, made a big mistake when, under the impress of "foreign, Marxist ideologies," we accepted the silly and somewhat inane notion that all men are equal, thereby relinquishing our burden to be our less well-endowed brother's keeper - the "White Man's Burden," as Rudyard Kipling put it.
But before white evangelicals adopt wholesale the paternalistic attitudes toward the minorities which are purveyed in The Bell Curve, there are a number of reasons why they should pause.
FIRST, Herrnstein and Murray appear to be greatly mistaken in their claim that "racial groups" cannot improve their overall I.Q. test scores - for example, Jews and certain Asian populations which score high today, scored near the bottom of the "Bell Curve" at the turn of the last century (please see the November issues of The Nation and New Republic). [Please also see David Perkins, Learnable Intelligence: Breaking the I.Q. Barrier, which appears in the same Free Press catalogue as The Bell Curve, and Robert Sternberg, Beyond I.Q.]
SECOND, Christians have other reasons to doubt the conclusions of The Bell Curve. The plain fact of the matter is, the scientific premise of psychometry (i.e., intelligence testing) - and ipso facto, The Bell Curve - is predicated, in the end, on evolutionism.
That alone should be reason enough for any evangelical to question the underlying "science" on which Herrnstein and Murray rely. And this is no presumption on our part: both Herrnstein and Murray acknowledge the link between psychometry and evolutionism throughout the book. For example, in describing the history of psychometry, they write - on page 1, no less –
"Variation in intelligence became the subject of productive scientific study in the last half of the nineteenth century, stimulated, like so many other intellectual developments of that era, by Charles Darwin's theory of evolution."
THIRD, and more telling still, is the link that Herrnstein and Murray make between criminality and I.Q. The authors write,
"The statistical association between crime and cognitive ability has been known since intelligence testing (i.e., psychometry) began in earnest. The British physician Charles Goring mentioned a lack of intelligence as one of the distinguishing traits of the prison population that he described in a landmark contribution to modern criminology early in the century."
In other words, sin (ie., criminality) - to a large degree - is the result of low I.Q. And Christians need to fully understand that this is exactly the point Herrnstein and Murray are making; they are not being "woolly" about it: they believe that there is a clear correlation between low-I.Q. and sin.
To say the least, Christians had better be careful here! - what Herrnstein and Murray are clearly implying plainly contradicts the teaching of the Bible - that "All have sinned and come short of the glory of God" (Romans 3:23); that sin (ie., "criminality") has nothing to do with I.Q., but is contingent upon man's "fallen nature;" that the propensity to sin is resident in all humans - and in equal amounts, regardless of intelligence. Or perhaps, there was no need (or less of a need) for Christ to hang on a cross for those with high I.Q.s, only for those with low "cognitive abilities?" [And one should not make the mistake that Herrnstein and Murray have made some kind of distinction between sin and "criminality" - that perhaps there is more violence associated with "criminality" than there is with sin - and that is what the authors are really talking about. Nonsense! Herrnstein and Murray make no such distinction! and neither does the Bible.]
Indeed, it's not without reason that Honoré de Balzac wrote,
"Behind every great fortune there is a great crime."
And more than that, it is why Jesus said,
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." (Mark 10:25)
At the very least, it would appear - if one subscribes to the findings of Herrnstein and Murray - that the "protective power of elevated intelligence" is a shield against man's disposition towards sin. [Please see our article, "Capitalism and Christianity."]
But, again, this is patently absurd from a Biblical perspective! - and extremely dangerous from a sociological standpoint; it's this kind of perspective that produced the first "mercy killings" of "substandard" human beings in Germany in 1936, and to say that this couldn't happen in this country if this type of thinking really takes hold is extremely naive.
FOURTH, and finally, despite the authors' Herculean attempts to disconnect The Bell Curve from the sordid history of the Eugenics Movement, the attempts must be judged as failures. Even the well-respected conservative magazine American Spectator sees the connection. Clearly Caldwell saw it - and one cannot help but excuse the panic all this has produced in the black and Latino population - the protestations of Herrnstein and Murray notwithstanding. To members of both communities, the scholarly - and, therefore, rather tepid - racist disclaimers by Herrnstein and Murray,
"... smack (more like) a white Southerner's claims that the original Ku Klux Klan consisted [merely] of pranksters whose high jinks sometimes got out of hand - more like Kappa Sigs [a college fraternity] of the Reconstruction era – [than anything else]."
Moreover, the references that both men cite in The Bell Curve do little to alleviate the fear and paranoia the book has engendered in the minority communities. For example, they approvingly allude to the works of men and women like Linda Gottfredson, and J. Philippe Rushton - scholars whose research, both Murray and Herrenstein contend, has been maligned by ideologically motivated "environmentalists," "egalitarians," and "politically correct" liberals. [Please see our article, "The Pioneer Fund and the Nazi Connection."]
But a little investigation into the "research" of these people might cause one to consider that minority communities have something to fear after all - that more than just an irrational paranoia is driving the minority communities' response to the Trump's policies to reign in the black and Hispanic communities. [Please see our article, "The Tanton Files; Nativist Leader's Racist Past Exposed."]
Take Rushton, a developmental psychologist at the University of Western Ontario, for example. Herrnstein and Murray claim that "Rushton's work is not that of a crackpot or a bigot, as many of his critics are given to charging ... His work is plainly science ... He is ... (merely) seeking an evolutionary explanation of the observed differences between the races" - all this about a man who presents racial rankings on a "Criteria for Civilization" (only "Caucasoids," naturally, consistently meet all twenty-one items on his checklist) and Personality and Temperament Traits," in addition to erect penis size (by length and circumference, no less), as well as the rest of the stock-in-trade of Nazi era "scientific racism," and who computes an "Interbreeding Depression Score" to help clarify his statistical findings?" And that's not all! There's more! Rushton also claims that:
And lest anyone does not fully "get" what Rushton is talking about here, Stefan Kuhl, a German sociologist, explains:
"Due to their [the blacks] lack of intelligence and social skills, Rushton ... argues, blacks can only compete with whites ... in the evolutionary process by maintaining a higher level of sexual activity.
"This could be proved, he [Rushton] asserts, by the fact that the penises and vaginas of blacks are larger on average, and that blacks have a higher premarital, marital, and extramarital intercourse frequency. The higher percentage of AIDS infections among blacks is therefore presented as the result of their genetically preeminent sexual behavior."
When Herrnstein and Murray defend people like Rushton, what are blacks to think? And one shouldn't make the mistake that Herrnstein and Murray are not aware of what Rushton is all about. For example, they write concerning the "reproductive strategies" of blacks - as described by Rushton:
"To reach his conclusion [on black "reproductive strategies"], Rushton starts with the well-established observation in biology that species vary in their reproductive strategies. Some species produce many offspring [per parent] of which only a small fraction survive; others produce small numbers of offspring with relatively high survival rates. The involvement of parents in their offsprings' health and development [which biologists call 'parental investment' - Herrnstein and Murray] tends to be high for species having few offspring and high survival rates [ie., whites] and low for those employing the other strategy ["many offspring and low survival rates," ie., blacks] ... Rushton's thesis is that this standard biological principle may be applied within our own specie ... the average Negroid is ... [genetically predisposed] towards [the principle of "many offspring, low survival"]."
In other words, because of their lower evolutionary development, blacks are sexually permissive and not very responsible as parents.
Herrnstein and Murray do acknowledge the fact that Rushton's theories on race are "... a long way from confirmation," but they add that -
"... Rushton has responded to his critics with increasingly detailed and convincing empirical reports ... (and) he has strengthened the case for consistently ordered race differences."
And exactly what are the differences that Herrnstein and Murray find so convincing?
- all these differences among the descendants of Adam? - a man the Bible claims lived a mere 6,000 years ago, a span of time hardly worth the blink of an eye in the evolutionist's scheme of things.
The sipped naivety of the 60-year-old ultra-liberal governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo - who is facing re-election this year - was put on display when he made some almost childlike remarks while addressing a crowd of black parishioners at the Mount Neboh Baptist Church regarding "black rhythm." Cuomo remarked that Catholics and Baptists have many of the same religious beliefs as blacks have, but Catholics and Baptists "do it without the rhythm." And then he turned his naivety on Jews in the audience: "But we try. We are not as without rhythm as some of our Jewish brothers and sisters."
And be clear here, Rushton is taking the stance that the differences between blacks and whites borders on being a difference between "species" and not just a difference one might find between different one type of dog, say a collie, and a German Shepherd.
Evangelicals (Biblical literalists) can't have it both ways. Either the Bible's account of Creation is true or it isn't! - and if it's true, then the entire premise of The Bell Curve fails, even if the statistics hold! After all, what's more important? Where should we put our faith? - in Herrnstein and Murray's math and "rock solid" statistical analysis or the Bible? in the mysteries of regression analysis and "standard deviation" or Genesis? in the NLSY Study or the Bible's account of Creation?
Either blacks and Latinos are our brothers and sisters in Adam or they're not! And if there are, a mere 6,000 years from Genesis to the present cannot possibly account for Rushton's racial differences - differences which he maintains are based on genetic heredity over a period of millions and millions of years.
So here we are as Christians - caught in a dilemma. Should we choose science (so-called) or should we choose the Bible?
This isn't the first time that Christians have been forced to choose between the two! - between "rock solid science" and faith! Whether we can show it or not, whether we can prove it or not, there's something wrong with a body of literature which suggests - even subtly and tangentially - that blacks and other minorities are not the genetic equals of whites! But that is exactly the "truth" (so-called) that one must ultimately embrace if one embraces "Creationism" and/or "Intelligent Design."
Next time, more on the thought processes and the evil nexus that undergirds the alliance that Christians in today's Apostate Church have made with the virtuosi whose thinking undergirds the eugenics inherent in "Creationism" and "Creative Design."
We ask you to bear in mind what the Apostle Paul told those who followed him; that if we have blessed you with SPIRITUAL gifts, is it too much to ask that you would reciprocate with FINANCIAL gifts? We especially need your support as a result of my wife's perilous condition in connection with her failing heart; also my failing health as a result of an unexplained and bizarre illness which placed me into a coma for nine days last year. I truly believe that this was an attack on me by Satan; I was rescued only by the direct intervention of God so that I could continue to warn Christians concerning the "end of days" and the appearance of Trump as the antiChrist.
In His love,
WE URGE YOU TO TAKE A STAND AND PUBLICALLY WITNESS AGAINST THE CHURCH'S ALMOST UNREASONING SUPPORT OF DONALD TRUMP. [PLEASE SEE OUR ARTICLE, "TRUMP AS THE ANTI-CHRIST."]
SPEAK OUT (ie., WITNESS) AGAINST THE DECEPTION OF THE FALSE PROPHETS OF TODAY'S CHURCH LIKE JOHN HAGEE.
The WHITE ROSE SOCIETY was a group formed by students Hans and Sophie Scholl and a band of Christian friends and professors. Their common goal was to stand against the Nazi regime that was terrorizing their country in the early 1940's, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY TO DECLARE THAT CHRIST WAS THE SUPREME POWER AND NOT ADOLPH HITLER. They secretly wrote and printed leaflets behind a church organ. They would then take as many as 2000 of them at a time and randomly distribute this bold writing in cities such as Stuttgart, Frankfurt, Vienna, Frieburg, Saarbreuken and Mannheim. As a result of taking part in these activities, seven of its members were executed between February 1943 and October 1944.
THE QUESTION HERE, AS IT WAS FOR SOPHIE AND HANS SCHOLL IS THIS: DO YOU FEAR MORE THE WRATH OF MAN OR THE WRATH OF GOD??
Finally, we urge you to download our flyers and pass them out; nail them to trees, lamp-posts; place them on cars, in windows; hand them to your neighbors and friends, etc. Download flyers to be passed out to friends and neighbors and pinned on trees, in windows, on church bulletin boards, etc.
In the light of all that's been happening recently - and we speak here of the Trump presidency, Islamic terrorism, the new anti-Semitism directed against both Jews and the Jewish state (Israel), the growing storm clouds over the Middle east which are harbingers of the coming Gog / Magog War, and that my wife and I can recover fully from our illnesses so that the work of the ministry can continue with vigor. In connection with the work of the ministry, we DESPERATELY need your financial help if we are to continue on with the work God has given us. The help you send will not accrue to any single individual, but will be directed to the effort of the ministry to bring TRUTH to you that you cannot receive anywhere else.
We ask you to bear in mind what the Apostle Paul told those who followed him; that if we have blessed you with SPIRITUAL gifts, is it too much to ask that you would reciprocate with FINANCIAL gifts.
Shearer is a graduate of the University of California where he earned a Bachelor's degree (1964) and a Master's degree (1967) in history (Davis and Berkeley). He also attended the United States Defense Language Institute in Monterey where he studied German. He served as an intelligence officer in Europe; in Asia he served with the 525th Intelligence Group, Special Operations Branch, and at the Phoenix School at Vung Tau (SEA). In addition, he served as executive officer for the Sacramento field office of the 515th Counter Intelligence (CI) Group in Sacramento and later as executive officer for 515th CI Group's Regional Office in San Francisco. Shearer held Top Secret, Special Intelligence, Codeword security, Eyes Only clearances; also Cosmic, NATO and Atomic clearances.