Text Box: Publish Monthly by 
Pilgrim’s Bible Church
Timothy Fellows Pastor
JUL-DEC, 2002


Featured Articles

Heresy of Exalting Originals Over Copies

Lost Art of Scripture Memorization

A Fundamentalist Apology

He has a Hole under His nose and His Money runs into it

"Birds of a Feather" & "Beer Belongs"

Remember Me?

Psalm 58 and Fetal Alcohol Syndrome






































































































The HERESY of Exalting

The Originals above the Copies

Dr. Alan Cairns, in his Dictionary of Theological Terms, defines Heresy as "A deliberate denial of revealed truth, together with the acceptance of error (2 Peter 2:1). The basic meaning of the Greek word hairesis is "choice," giving the meaning of heresy as a self-willed opinion in opposition to Biblical truth. Such opinions frequently gave rise to sects or parties {Acts 5:17; 15:5; 24:5,14; 26:5; 28:22; I Cor. 11:19; Gal. 5:20). A heretic, therefore, is a sectarian. Thus he is to be cut off from church fellowship (Titus 3:10)." boldface added

The history of Christianity is a history of heresies, oppositions, strifes and divisions, each requiring and demanding Biblical rebuttals, arguments and sound apologies so as to stop the mouths of the disobedient, unlearned and unstable while strengthening the hearts, minds and souls of true believers.

It is the heresy which comes first, requiring the church to define Biblical dogma. Pelagianism came first before the Doctrines of Grace were officially systematized. (Of course the doctrines of grace were always held, but never needed to be systematized officially until there

was a heresy requiring it.)

Throughout the history of the early church, councils, creeds and dogmas were the resulting consensus of the church in response to heresies and heretics. Arianism, Gnosticism, Docetism, Apollinarianism, Nestorianism, etc. were all different falsehoods which assaulted Biblical teachings -- such as the person and nature of Christ, Deity of

Christ, existence of the Holy Spirit, literal body of Christ, etc. Each step of the way, the church was made to officially define, systematize and organized true Biblical dogma (that doctrine which must be believed to be a Christian). Each historical heresy has been different from the others, yet all share the same repudiation and rejection of the authority of the Bible.

There was only one Council of Nicea (325), where the Deity of Christ was first officially defended and defined; only one Council of Chalcedon (451) where Christ was officially defended by the church as being one person with two natures and having a completely human body. There was only one Protestant Reformation.

Imagine Martin Luther complaining, "Boy, nobody ever faced this before?" Such an exclusive historical loneliness did not relieve him of fulfilling his Christian duty of giving a true apology of the Christian faith.

Luther said, "If I profess with the loudest voice and clearest expression every portion of the truth of God, except precisely that little portion which the world and the devil are at that moment attacking, I am not confessing Christ, however boldly I may be professing Christ. Where the battle rages, there the loyalty of the soldier is proved, and to be steady on all the battlefield besides is mere flight and disgrace if he flinches at that point."

He is not a faithful soldier who bravely guards the side of the castle presently not under attack; he is the real soldier who is in the heat of the battle where he’s needed most, without flinching or cowering.

Who were the faithful men of God when the Trinity was being attacked, way back in the early church? Were they the guys cleverly avoiding the controversial issues of the day, while still preaching a "good message"? Did it really matter how good of a message they preached on the glories of creation if they were not coming to the defense of the Trinity while it was being attacked? Yet, how many preachers and groups revel in their affirmation of the creeds of Christendom, while compromising doctrines currently under attack.

There is no glory in maintaining the orthodoxy of Biblical Christianity when it costs nothing. The glory and honour comes from being ready and willing to lose everything to keep the bad guys out and the truth from being corrupted.

Most everybody today within the umbrella of professing Christianity believes in the death of Jesus, His resurrection, His second coming, hell and heaven, the Virgin birth, creation, etc.... Now, while these were fought severely throughout church history, they are not at center stage right now. The only ones glorying in their strong affirmation of those old Bible doctrines are the sissies, wimps and weaklings who are too scared or too rich to fight where the heat of the battle: is at the moment -- while of course not giving up the rest of the castle.

Where is the battle raging today? The answer to such a question requires a certain degree of discernment, but even a blind and deaf and dumb man can tell when the castle outside is at war. That doesn’t say much for the Christian today who doesn’t know what the issues are currently facing his own religion. Take that knife out of his hand, he might just stab one of his own men, or himself.

A little over one hundred years ago, a new heresy was beginning to be germinated by some unregenerate "scholars." The heresy did not involve any single teaching or doctrine in the Bible like all the others before it, but this was a distinctly new and serious and greater heresy to date -- one involving the Bible itself. What does it matter if the devil pulled off any one of the other heresies involving the person of Christ or the existence of the Holy Spirit, if he could attack the very veracity and legitimacy of the entire Bible? None of the other heresies could even come close to accomplishing his purpose.

This heresy sown over one hundred years ago has blossomed into the greatest infidelity, apostasy, blasphemy and hypocrisy within the ranks of professing Christianity that the devil has ever dreamed or imagined could be possible. You’ve come a long way baby, listening to that old serpent in the garden – the oldest lie, and the newest heresy --"Yea, hath God said...?"

There is a new philosophical argument now espoused by many professing Bible believers that the original manuscripts and original languages were superior to any copies or translations made from them.

Historically, true, born-again believers have judged all things by the Word of God, the Bible, but this new heresy creates a new law outside of the Bible whereby judgment is passed upon the Bible itself-- this law being that the originals are superior and the copies are inferior. Where does the Bible teach such a law? Do people who use this extra Biblical law to judge the Bible really esteem the Bible as the absolute authority? I trow not. Where is their authority? Where is their Bible?

The Mormons, Muslims, Jehovah Witnesses and Roman Catholics all have an advantage over the modem Fundamentalist - at least they have a Bible.

This new philosophy is a very man-centered, humanistic approach to the

Bible, requiring its own priesthood, sacrifice and altar. It cannot exist without experts, professionals, scholars, linguists, and intellectuals, and it doesn’t matter so much whether they are called of God, as long as they are qualified before men.

This new heresy operates like a "scientific" approach to finding out what happened based on what we see now -- outside of the historically preserved Bible. It’s like the scientists who use dating methods and come up with millions and billions of years, while rejecting Biblical records stating thousands. It’s an attempt at proving what the Bible is, with the assumption that the Bible can’t be used to do it.

The assumption of this heresy is that the Word of God we presently have – the only one passed down to us through history -- is not the measuring rod for itself and cannot speak for itself, but external means and methods must be used to decide its legitimacy. Of course, trying to get a born-again Christian to prove his Bible without using his Bible is like telling an architect to build an accurate house without his tools. If there is no absolute standard by which to judge things, how can one use errant tools and produce an inerrant building?

This new heresy has many slogans, "Well, it’s just a translation" --

suggesting a new law that translations cannot effectively and effectually communicate the same idea as the original, and inferring an inferior status and nature of the translation to the original text. Thus, by distinguishing a version from the actual Bible (which is yet to be found), they in effect nullify their own version’s front cover which reads, "Holy Bible." They don’t really consider it the Bible, nor do they really consider it holy (pure, clean, consecrated and true without any mixture of error). Such people are by definition, hypocrites and heretics.

While the Bible does not teach this new heretical law ("Well, it’s just a translation.") neither do those who advocate such a heresy actually believe their own law, because after they have pointed out the obvious fact that a certain translation was translated -- and therefore inferior -- they immediately give their own translation which they hope will be esteemed as superior.

But if there is a law that a translation cannot effectively communicate from one language to another, then correcting our present translation can do no good, because one must give his own translation to do so -- and that’s why there are so many "versions" of the Bible today. Each person becomes his own authority over the Word of God. But there is only one Bible.

The Bible itself which is the largest book in the world of the most varied translations proves the statement "it’s just a translation" heretical.

Among myriads of other examples, many Old Testament words, phrases, sentences and passages are directly translated into the New Testament. Now, if the modern heretical law is correct that a translation is automatically inferior to its source, then the New Testament was originally penned as errant -- a thing even the most sincere advocates of the new heresy today blatantly deny. The fact the Bible itself translates thousands of times without any error, inferiority are detraction is Bible proof that if men can’t do it, at least God can, and our preserved copy in one language is living proof.

If the modern heretical law recently created by humanistic theologians – that the originals are more accurate, trustworthy and reliable than the copies -- is true, then the Bible of all places would support, reflect and teach such a law. One would expect Jesus of all people digging in the old ruins trying to find the originals of the Old Testament books and admonishing people to learn Hebrew, Chaldee and Egyptian, yet when the Bible speaks of him reading scripture, it does not anywhere mention originals, but copies. Nor does it speak of him

Transliterating in the temple. If the Bible itself does not teach any superiority of originals to copies or translations, then why do professing Bible scholars do so?

If the Bible itself calls translated copies "scriptures" that are "profitable" and able to make one "perfect" and "wise" – why do professing Bible-believers imagine anything else will do them any more good? Is it not that they are really heretics rejecting the revealed truth God has already given and forming sects based on their own proud and haughty opinions and damnable heresies? Shall their pride lift them any higher than hell? We shall see.

Another one of the many slogans this new heresy advertises itself by is -- "Even the KJV translators acknowledged the meanness and commonness and uncertainty of their own work." By relying on such an assessment, such heretics actually submit the Bible text to the Translator’s preface -- as if the preface was inspired and thus the text wasn’t! The Translator’s preface was not inspired, or authoritative, or infallible, but the Bible itself is the greatest proof that God can take fallible men and preserve his infallible word. God can even use a jackass to communicate his truth while leaving scholars to bray out their own shame.

Another slogan promoted by this heresy involves the assumption and newly created law that "people closer to the originals understood them more than we understand our copies now." There is a new effort in seminaries to use extra-Biblical sources, documents, climate patterns and cultural traditions to use as a back drop in understanding the Bible as we have it today (wherever that may be to the one currently studying it.)

The Bible, however, clearly states that the promises given by the prophets were not for them, but for us (I Peter 1:10-12). In many places the Scripture teaches that many of the prophets, writers, penmen, scribes, Apostles did not even understand the very things they were writing, because they were meant for us and for our posterity. Those things were not better understood by recipients of the originals, but by much later recipients of the copies -- far removed. Our copies do us more good than their originals did for them. So, who’s not satisfied? Only the heretics.

Another side-effect produced by this new heresy is an appeal to statements made by good Christians throughout history, so as to justify the heresy. However, sinners have been doing that very thing all throughout history to justify their sins --"Well, David did it!" -- but God will continue to judge them by His Word alone, nor will he consider their intellectual arguments to have any merit.

The Irony of the early church councils, creeds and Christians in the third and fourth centuries

What did they decide? They did not convey authority upon the 66 books of the Bible, but simply recognized them as authoritative, truly of God and that there were no more. The real Word of God stood up for itself; they simply identified it.

The irony of the matter is that most advocates of the new heresy today

acknowledge the proper decisions of the early church councils as good and true, yet those very councils condemn the modern heresy of exalting the originals above the copies, because 1. The canon of Scripture was closed and settled as to what was the Bible and what was not the Bible. 2. There was no assumption that there were any books missing that could be added later. 3. They did not dig to find their canon, but labeled the true books in distinction from the many errant ones in circulation passed off as legitimate.

Now, if a group of Christians could decide what the real books were (Genesis, Romans, etc.) and what the frauds were (Epistle of Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, etc.), then cannot a group of Christians also decide what the real words of those books are, and what the frauds are? If the true church can identify the canon of books, can not the true church also identify the canon of words of those books? If the genuine Bible stood up for itself as pertaining to the books, is it not silly to imagine that the genuine Bible cannot stand up for itself as pertaining to words?

The solemn answer is that it’s the false church historically that couldn’t identify the correct Bible -- no fault of the Bible. Mormons, Muslims, Jehovah Witnesses and Roman Catholics all have their own Bibles, but they’re fraudulent. Must Fundamentalists be added to the list? God doesn’t change Bibles.

If the answer is "no," we cannot identify all the genuine words, then maybe the Roman Catholic books are really correct, and should be added to the canon, which the Councils of Nicea, Carthage, Laodicea, etc. miserably failed at doing. After all, if the KJB translators passed off words that were spurious for four hundred years and still used by the church, then certainly the Council of Nicea could have passed off entire books that were spurious for 1700 years of church history -- Oh, what a tangled web a heresy weaves, but more wretched yet the bugs who get caught by that old Devil!

The Bible warns not to take heed to fables and endless genealogies which minister questions rather than godly edifying which is in faith. The endless onslaught of modern Bible Versions shows the endless genealogies and endless questions that are produced by the damnable heresy of exalting the unknown originals above the preserved copies. Such versions continually toss their readers to and fro, never for sure

about anything except their extra-Biblical laws they have created and worship and esteem as inspired while they ever remain learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.

The heresy of elevating the originals above the copies has produced every modern Bible Version in existence today outside of our historically preserved Bible, and there is no end in sight.

Has this new philosophy produced a revival, a love for God and for neighbor? Has this new philosophy generated more faith in the common man on the street who doesn’t know Greek, Hebrew, and hasn’t even seen a photocopy of an ancient copy not far removed from an original? Has more Scripture been committed to memory and meditated upon? Has any good come at all?

The reason such a philosophy is wrong as because it leaves God out of the picture and leaves all mankind at the mercy of men. And the Bible clearly states, "Cursed be the man that trusteth in man. Blessed is the man that trusteth in the LORD." (Jeremiah 17:5,7)

Certainly, when it comes to works of men, the original is of much greater value than a copy, but not when it comes to the Word of God. The original has no greater power, strength or worth: it’s merely paper and ink. The Power is in the word -- not the language or the parchment or the scroll or the papyrus.

"Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." (John 5:39) Aren’t you glad oh fellow believer that Christ did not command us to search the originals, or to learn dead languages! Beware of religious scholars, "For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men." (Matthew 23:4-5)

Christ’s sheep are not heretics. Christ said, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me (John 10: 27)." It isn’t a question or matter of intellectualism, heretics cannot nor will ever recognize or identify the Word of God, because they are not of his sheep. "But blessed are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear" (Matthew 13:16). "If any man have an ear, let him hear" (Revelation 13:9).

back to top


A PERVERTED VS A TRUE GOSPEL by "Metropolitan Press" Dominica, West Indies




"Scripture memorization is a lost art. I found out why. I spent over six months asking people the following questions. ‘Would you tell me from memory John 3:16?’ ‘Could you quote the Lord’s Prayer?’ ‘Can you tell me some or all of the 23rd (shepherd’s) Psalm?’ Over the months I made an amazing discovery. I spoke to people from all walks of life. from non-Christians to Christian bookstore employees, who handle every

kind of Bible imaginable. Nearly every person did the same thing: they quoted the King James. But many of these people do not read the King James. They read other Bible versions. Why then are they quoting the King James Bible? It’s an established fact: people quote the last version they memorized. These people stopped memorizing when they switched Bibles! Why did they stop memorizing? About every two years the modern translations change. (The NIV is notorious for this.) And in the churches, pastors regularly switch Bible versions when they preach. Since they don’t have anything clear and consistent to memorize, they stop trying. But there is a translation that stays the same: the King

James Bible! And it is more than consistent: it is the preserved words of God in English. It is so easy to memorize the King James. Just read your Bible out loud each day and write down your favorite verses. You will begin to notice how much scripture you are remembering. It’s important how much you are getting into the Word. Even more important - how much of the Word is getting into you!" (David W. Daniels)

-- Kingdom Alert

back to top

A Fundamentalist Apology

Dear Dr. L. I. Beral,

This open letter of apology is long overdue. It should have been written at least 10 perhaps 20, or even more years ago.

We Fundamentalists once chafed under your charge that we only had a "Bible Institute mentality," and were extremely limited by it. But, as we have made much intellectual progress since then, we now understand why you felt this. And, we want to apologize for any harm we may have done to you by the misinformation we spread among our people.

You will recall how we knit-picked and warned the people of our churches about the doctrinal error we picked out of the American Standard Version (1901). The translators rendered II Timothy 3:16 as "every scripture inspired of God" instead of the traditional "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." Oh, how we warned that it was a subtle denial of the inspiration of the entire canon. We declared it allowed for the reader to pick and choose what he felt was or was not inspired. We even encouraged our churches to abstain from any use of the ASV, lest we be tainted by it.

We raised a big stink about the translators choice of "young woman" instead of "virgin" for Isaiah 7:14 in the Revised Standard Version. We cried out against this "blatant denial" of the virgin birth of Christ. And, again, we pled with our congregations to reject this perversion. One of us even had the nerve to preach that the use of "Thee, Thou, and Thy" only in reference to the Father, and using "you and yours" for Christ, was a deliberate denial of his deity.

We did these things out of ignorance. Perhaps you have noted how we have grown in the last 30 to 35 years. We will never admit to being enamored with intellectualism or to bowing the knee to it. However, in our intellectual pursuits, we have learned to use textual criticism. We, too, now pick and choose what should or should not be included, not only in the choice of words, but even to the exclusion of whole passages.

We have learned the tremendous power of dynamic equivalence. We have learned we can substitute "death" for "blood" when dealing with Calvary. After all, "blood" only means Christ died a violent death. The thesis of a doctoral candidate attending one of our strongholds gave an excellent illustration of the use of dynamic equivalence as early as 1978. He demonstrated how a particular passage was so much better translated in Today’s English Version (TEV, Good News for Modern Man) than the archaic King James. Many of us insisted that the Word of God should be translated, as closely as possible, word for word, not thought by thought. Oh, the heartache those of us must have caused when we relegated the TEV to a paraphrase, or at best a translation!

I recently talked with an undergraduate ministerial student from one of our leading institutions. Our discussion lead to the matter of preservation. When I asked him what he thought of the King James, he observed that he believed it "contained" the Word of God, and that preservation could only apply to original autographs. We regret the anguish we caused when we insisted on preservation being evident in a translation of the Bible.

The untimely resignation of Dr. Frank Logsdon as the chairman of the committee of the New American Standard Version embarrassed many of us. We were amazed that such a scholar could declare, "We will give an account at the Judgment Seat of Christ for what we have done with the Word of God." But, the NASV survived and is highly revered. And so have a multitude of others. Our people can now pick and choose what they are at ease with. How can anyone charge that this has helped bring about a diminishing interest in memorizing the Scripture because there is no longer a standard?

Please pass this letter along to Dr. Neo Orthodoxy, as we have engaged in much rethinking of positions we once took. Dr. Neo Evangelical will be pleased as we move near to the day of establishing dialogue on the basis of scholastic endeavor and intelligent research.


Knee O. Fundamentalist

P.S. There are still a band of old-time Fundamentalists ("Fundies") that refuse to join in the presentation of this letter. But they will grow less in number as we use some of the phrases from your old tactic of scorn. Before long there won’t be a "fungus amongus." After all they have no fun and no mentality, only a lot of …(that middle syllable).

Tong-in-cheek Publications

Ira D. Scribe, Publisher

back to top

He has a hole under his nose and his money runs into it…

This is the man who is always dry, because he takes so much heavy wet. He is a loose fellow who is fond of getting tight. He is no sooner up than his nose is in the cup, and his money begins to run down the hole which is just under his nose. He is not a blacksmith, but he has a spark in his throat, and all the publican’s barrels can’t put it out. If a pot of beer is a yard off land, he must have swallowed more acres than a ploughman could get over for many a day, and still he goes on swallowing until he takes to wallowing. All goes down Gutter Lane. Like the snipe, he lives by suction. If you ask him how he is, he says he would be quite right if he could moisten his mouth. His purse is a bottle, his bank is the publican’s till, and his casket is a cask: pewter is his precious metal, and his pearl is a mixture of gin and beer. The dew of his youth comes from Ben Nevis, and the comfort of his soul is cordial gin. He is a walking barrel, a living drainpipe, a moving swilltub. They say" loth to drink and loth to leave off," but he never needs persuading to begin, and as to ending that is out of the question while he can borrow two-pence. This is the gentleman who sings—

He that buys land buys many stones,

He that buys meat buys many bones,

He that buys eggs buys many shells,

He that buys good ale buys nothing else.

He will never be hanged for leaving his drink behind him. He drinks in season and out of season: in summer because he is not, and in winter because he is cold. A drop of beer never comes too soon, and he would get up in the middle of the night for more, only he goes to bed too tipsy. He had heard that if you get wet-foot a glass of whiskey in your boots will keep you from catching cold, and he argues that the best way to get one glass of the spirit into each boot is to put two doses where it will run into your legs. He is never long without an excuse for another pot, or if perchance he does not make one, another lushington helps him.

Some drink when friends step in,

And some when they step out;

Some drink because they’re thin,

And some because they’re stout.

Some drink because ’tis wet.

And some because ’tis dry;

Some drink another glass

To wet the other eye.

Water is this gentleman’s abhorrence, whether used inside or out, but most of all he dreads it taken inwardly, except with spirits, and then the less the better. He says that the pump would kill him, but he never gives it a chance. He laps his liquor and licks his chaps, but he will never die through the badness of the water from the well. It is a pity that he does not run the risk. Drinking cold water neither makes a man sick, nor in debt, nor his wife a widow, but this mighty fine ale of his will do all this for him, make him worse than a beast while he lives, and wash him away to his grave before his time. The old Scotchman said, "Death and drink-draining are near neighbors," and he spoke the truth. They say that drunkenness make some men fools, some beasts, and some devils; but according to my mind it makes all men fools whatever else it does. Yet when a man is as drunk as a rat he sets up to be a judge, and mocks at sober people. Certain neighbors of mine laugh at me for being a teetotaler, and I might well laugh at them for being drunk, only I feel more inclined to cry that they should be such fools. O that we could get them sober, and then perhaps we might make men of them. You cannot do much with these fellows, unless you can enlist them in the Coldstream guards.

He that any good would win

At his mouth must first begin.

As long as drink drowns conscience and reason, you might as well talk to the hogs. The rascals will promise fair and take the pledge, and then take their coats to pledge to get more beer. We smile at a tipsy man, for he is a ridiculous creature, but when we see how he is ruined body and soul it is no joking matter. How solemn is the truth that "No drunkard shall inherit eternal life."

There’s nothing too bad for a man to say or do when he is half-seas over. It is a pity that any decent body should go near such a common sewer. If he does not fall into the worst of crimes it certainly is not his fault, for he has made himself ready for anything the devil likes to put into his mind. He does least hurt when he begins to be top-heavy, and to reel about: then he becomes a blind man with good eyes in his head, a cripple with legs on. He sees two moons, and two doors to the public house, and tries to find his way through both the doors at once. Over he goes, and there he must he unless somebody will wheel him home in a barrow or carry him to the police station.

Solomon says the glutton and the drunkard shall come to poverty, and that the drinker does in no time. He gets more and more down at the heel, and as his nose gets redder and his body is more swollen he gets to be more of a shark and more of a shark. His trade is gone, and his credit has run out, but he still manages to get his beer. He treats an old friend to a pot, and then finds that he has left his purse at his home, and of course the old friend must pay the shot. He borrows till no one will lend him a groat, unless it is to get off lending a shilling. Shame has long since left him, though all who know him are ashamed of him. His talk runs like the tap, and is full of stale dregs: he is very kind over his beer, and swears he loves you, and would like to drink to your health, and love you again. Poor sot, much good will his blessing do to any one who gets it; his poor wife and family have had to much of it already, and quake at the very sound of his voice.

Now, if we try to do anything to shut up a boozing-house, or shorten then hours for guzzling, we are called all sorts of bad names, and the windup of it all is – "What! Rob a poor man of his beer?" The fact is that they rob the poor man by his beer. The ale-jug robs the cupboard and the table, starves the wife and strips the children; it is a great thief, housebreaker, and heartbreaker, and the best possible thing is to break it to pieces, or keep it on the shelf bottom upwards. In a newspaper, which was lent me, the other day I saw some verses by John Barleycorn, Jun., and as they tickled my fancy I copied them out, and here they are.

What! Rob a poor man of his beer,

And give him good victuals instead!

Your heart’s very hard, sir, I fear,

Or at least you are soft in the head.

What! Rob a poor man of his mug,

And give him a house of his own;

With kitchen and parlour so snug!

‘Tis enough to draw tears from a stone.

What! Rob a poor man of his glass,

And teach him to read and to write!

What! Save him from being an as!

‘Tis nothing but malice and spite.

What! Rob a poor man of his ale,

And prevent him from beating his wife,

From being locked up in a jail,

With penal employment for life!

What! Rob a poor man of his beer,

And keep him from starving his child!

It makes one feel awfully queer,

And I’ll thank you to draw it more mild.


Having given a song, I now hand you a handbill to stick up in the "Rose and Crown" window, if the landlord wants an advertisement. It is quite as good as new. Any beer-seller may print it who thinks it likely to help his trade.






























-- From Charles Spurgeon’s John Ploughman’s Pictures

back to top


--Both poems anonymous, printed by Pilgrim Tract Society

Remember Me?

My name is Gossip. I have no respect for Justice.

I maim without killing. I break hearts and ruin lives.

I am cunning and malicious and gather strength with age.

The more I am quoted the more I am believed.

I flourish at every level of society.

My victims are helpless. They cannot protect themselves from me because I have no name and no face.

To track me down is impossible. The harder you try, the more elusive I become.

I am nobody’s friend.

Once I tarnish a reputation, it is never quite the same.

I topple governments and wreck marriages.

I ruin careers, cause sleepless nights, heartache and indigestion.

I spawn suspicion and generate grief.

I make innocent people cry in their pillows.

Even my name hisses. I am called Gossip. Office gossip. Shop gossip. Party gossip. I make headlines and headaches. Before you repeat a story ask yourself, is it true? Is it fair? Is it necessary? If not—SHUT UP.

Author unknown.


Psalm 58 and "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome"

1. "Do ye indeed speak righteousness, O congregation? do ye judge uprightly, O ye sons of men?"

-- Impaired Judgment

2. "Yea, in heart ye work wickedness; ye weigh the violence of your hands in the earth."

-- Heart and mind given to evil "Thine eyes shall behold strange women, and thine heart shall utter perverse things."

(Proverbs 23:33)

3. "The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies."

-- Effects on the unborn --

4,5. "Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: They are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear; Which will not hearken to the voice of charmers, charming never so wisely."

-- When alcohol is consumed by a pregnant woman, the only things to pass through the placenta are two poisons exactly like the serpent’s venom, a hemo-toxin and the adder’s venom, a neuro-toxin.

-- Deafness is one symptom of "Fetal Alcohol Syndrome."

6. "Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions O LORD."

-- The most common evidence of FAS is absence of the indentation on the upper lip (mild); to cleft lip (moderate), to cleft pallet (severe).

7. "Let them melt away as waters which run continually: -when he bendeth his bow to shoot his arrows, let them be as cut in pieces:"

--Early rupture of membranes (water breaks) and placental detachment

8,9. "As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun. Before your pots can feel the thorns, he shall take them away as with a whirlwind, both living, and in his wrath "

-- Miscarriage and Stillbirth

10,11 "The righteous shall rejoice when he seeth the vengeance: he shall wash his feet in the blood of the wicked. So that a man shall say, Verily there is a reward for the righteous: verily he is a God that judgeth in the earth."

-- God himself is sure to judge between those who claim to be righteous (vs. 1) and those who are indeed righteous. "Be not deceived: God is not mocked for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap" (Galatians 6:7); "be sure your sin will find you out" (Numbers 32:23c).

-- Information provided by my good wife, Andrea, who has studied natural/Biblical child-birth/midwifery. "Fetal" is not our term, but used by the world.