Adobe Flash Player is required to view this feature. If you are using an operating system that does not support Flash, we are working to bring you alternative formats. Special Article 21st-Century Hazards of Smoking and Benefits of Cessation in the United States Prabhat Jha, M.D., Chinthanie Ramasundarahettige, M.Sc., Victoria Landsman, Ph.D., Brian Rostron, Ph.D., Michael Thun, M.D., Robert N.

Anderson, Ph.D., Tim McAfee, M.D., and Richard Peto, F.R.S. N Engl J Med 2013; 368:341-350 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa1211128. Results For participants who were 25 to 79 years of age, the rate of death from any cause among current smokers was about three times that among those who had never smoked (hazard ratio for women, 3.0; 99% confidence interval [CI], 2.7 to 3.3; hazard ratio for men, 2.8; 99% CI, 2.4 to 3.1). Most of the excess mortality among smokers was due to neoplastic, vascular, respiratory, and other diseases that can be caused by smoking. The probability of surviving from 25 to 79 years of age was about twice as great in those who had never smoked as in current smokers (70% vs. 38% among women and 61% vs. 26% among men).

Life expectancy was shortened by more than 10 years among the current smokers, as compared with those who had never smoked. Adults who had quit smoking at 25 to 34, 35 to 44, or 45 to 54 years of age gained about 10, 9, and 6 years of life, respectively, as compared with those who continued to smoke. Figure 2 Survival Probabilities for Current Smokers and for Those Who Never Smoked among Men and Women 25 to 80 Years of Age. The vertical lines at 80 years of age represent the 99% confidence intervals for cumulative survival probabilities, as derived from the standard errors estimated with the use of the jackknife procedure. Survival probabilities have been scaled from the National Health Interview Survey to the U.S. Rates of death from all causes at these ages for 2004, with adjustment for differences in age, educational level, alcohol consumption, and adiposity (body-mass index). Smoking is a major cause of premature death worldwide.

Nov 26, 2002. When a person tapers off of cigarettes or has already stopped smoking, his symptoms of nervousness, anxiety and irritability can be greatly lessened with medications. Jesus Christ, during His earthly ministry, regularly demonstrated His love, mercy and concern for others by healing the sick.

Despite substantial declines in the prevalence of smoking by adults, estimates based on extrapolation from studies in the 1980s suggest that for those between 35 and 69 years of age, smoking currently accounts for almost 200,000 deaths annually in the United States, or about one fourth of all deaths in this age group. The prevalence of smoking peaked around 1960 among U.S. Men and about two decades later among U.S. Rates of death from vascular disease have decreased substantially since the 1980s owing to reductions in smoking and in other risk factors and to improved treatment. Therefore, extrapolation from previous studies is increasingly uncertain, and direct measurement of the contemporary hazards of smoking in the United States is needed. Moreover, a substantial number of adults have quit smoking in recent decades, affording an opportunity to study the effects of cessation at various ages on current mortality.

We report the results of a large, prospective, nationally representative study of smoking and its relation to mortality to provide estimates of the 21st-century hazards of smoking and of the benefits of smoking cessation at various ages for male and female smokers. Study Design We examined data from a cohort of 216,917 adults in the U.S. National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) between 1997 and 2004 that were linked to the National Death Index.

The NHIS is a nationally representative cross-sectional health survey of the civilian, noninstitutionalized population of the United States. The survey uses a stratified, multistage sample design that permits representative sampling of households. One adult (≥18 years of age) is randomly selected from each selected household for a detailed interview on health and other behaviors. The NHIS sample is drawn from each state and the District of Columbia. Each year, approximately 35,000 households and 87,500 persons are newly enrolled in the survey. Black and Hispanic persons are deliberately oversampled, but the sample weights ensure that the final totals conform to national ethnic proportions.

The NHIS sampling frame excludes only about 7 million adults (chiefly patients in long-term care facilities, prisoners, and active-duty military personnel) from the total U.S. Domestic population of 226 million adults in 2004. Mortality among survey participants through the end of 2006 was assessed by means of periodic matching of their records to the National Death Index, which includes death-certificate information for all deaths in the United States since 1986. Matching was performed for a combination of name, Social Security number, and date of birth, with a success rate exceeding 95%.

Enrollment rates for women exceeded those for men. A total of 122,810 women and 94,107 men 25 years of age or older participated in the NHIS between 1997 and 2004. Of these participants, 9058 women (761 of whom died) and 5611 men (544 of whom died) were excluded because of missing variables (e.g., educational level, smoking status, drinking status, or cause of death). Statistical Analysis Life-threatening illness can cause smokers to quit, which distorts the rates of death among current smokers and among those who have quit smoking recently in opposite ways. Unlike previous analyses of NHIS results, our analyses classified former smokers who had quit within 5 years before death as current smokers. Participants were classified as former smokers if they had smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime but had not smoked within the previous 5 years.

Participants were classified as never having smoked if they had smoked fewer than 100 cigarettes in their lifetime. We calculated hazard ratios for current and former smokers with the use of an age-stratified Cox proportional-hazards model, adjusted for educational level (less than high school, high school, or more than high school), alcohol consumption (nondrinker, former drinker, light drinker [1 to 2 drinks per day for women and 1 to 3 drinks per day for men] or moderate-to-heavy drinker [3 or more drinks per day for women and 4 or more drinks per day for men]), and adiposity (a body-mass index [the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters] of. Characteristics of the Study Participants Current smokers more commonly consumed alcohol, had lower educational levels, and had a lower body-mass index than did former smokers or those who had never smoked ( Table 1 Baseline Characteristics and Deaths in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Cohort, According to Smoking Status. About two thirds of current smokers and of former smokers had started smoking before 20 years of age.

The proportion of former smokers increased steeply with age ( Figure 1 Age-Specific Proportions of Participants in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) According to Baseline Smoking Status, 1997–2004. The proportions of NHIS participants who were current smokers, former smokers, and those who never smoked are shown for women (Panel A) and for men (Panel B). ), so that they were, on average, older than current smokers and those who had never smoked. Cessation of smoking was less common among women than among men; the ratio of former smokers to current smokers at 65 to 69 years of age was 2:1 for women but 4:1 for men. Mortality According to Smoking Status Among 113,752 women and 88,496 men 25 years of age or older at yearly recruitment, who were followed for a mean of 7 years (1.3 million person-years), a total of 15,715 deaths (8236 deaths in women and 7479 in men) were recorded (see Table S1 in the, available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org); 10,743 deaths (5122 in women and 5621 in men) occurred at 25 to 79 years of age.

The hazard ratios for overall mortality at 25 to 79 years of age among current smokers versus those who had never smoked were 3.0 for women (99% confidence interval [CI], 2.7 to 3.3) and 2.8 for men (99% CI, 2.4 to 3.1) ( Table 2 Adjusted Hazard Ratios for Various Causes of Death among Current Smokers, as Compared with Those Who Never Smoked, among Women and Men 25 to 79 Years of Age. Adjustment for educational level, alcohol consumption, and adiposity had little effect on these age-stratified hazard ratios (data not shown). These age-specific hazard ratios, together with the prevalence of current smoking, were combined with 2004 U.S. Death rates to estimate survival from 25 to 79 years of age for current smokers versus those who had never smoked, after adjustment for differences in age, educational level, and adiposity (body-mass index). This analysis showed that a person who had never smoked was about twice as likely as a current smoker to reach 80 years of age ( Figure 2 Survival Probabilities for Current Smokers and for Those Who Never Smoked among Men and Women 25 to 80 Years of Age. Programma Per Tradurre Pdf. The vertical lines at 80 years of age represent the 99% confidence intervals for cumulative survival probabilities, as derived from the standard errors estimated with the use of the jackknife procedure.

Survival probabilities have been scaled from the National Health Interview Survey to the U.S. Rates of death from all causes at these ages for 2004, with adjustment for differences in age, educational level, alcohol consumption, and adiposity (body-mass index). Among women, the estimated probability of survival to the age of 80 years was 70% (99% CI, 64 to 76) for those who had never smoked but only 38% (99% CI, 30 to 45) for current smokers ( ). For men, these probabilities were 61% (99% CI, 55 to 67) for those who had never smoked but only 26% (99% CI, 18 to 33) for current smokers ( ).

Among current smokers, survival was shorter by about 11 years for women and by about 12 years for men, as compared with participants who had never smoked. Shows that much, though not all, of this difference in survival was due to neoplastic disease, vascular disease, or other diseases that previous studies have shown can be caused by smoking. Notably high hazard ratios were observed for deaths from lung cancer and from ischemic heart disease in both women and men and from stroke in women.

However, about 7% of the excess mortality among smokers at 25 to 79 years of age was due to accidents and injuries. In, only the excess mortality from disease (not from accidents and injuries) is attributed to smoking. At 25 to 79 years of age, about 62% (range, 59 to 65) of all deaths among female smokers and 60% (range, 55 to 63) of all deaths among male smokers would have been avoided if the rates of death from diseases among smokers had been the same as the rates among those who had never smoked and after adjustments for any differences in age, educational level, alcohol consumption, and adiposity. Benefits of Smoking Cessation Hazard ratios for deaths from all causes among former smokers, as compared with those who had never smoked, were similar for women and men and were combined for statistical stability (Table S2 in the ).

Lung cancer was associated with the highest hazard ratio for death among former smokers (Table S3 in the ). The effect of smoking cessation at younger ages was especially favorable ( Figure 3 Effect of Smoking Cessation on Survival to 80 Years of Age, According to Age at the Time of Quitting. Life expectancy was increased from 4 to 10 years among smokers who quit, depending on their age at the time of smoking cessation. Panel A shows the effect of quitting at 25 to 34 years of age (effect shown from the age of 30), Panel B the effect of quitting at 35 to 44 years of age (effect shown from the age of 40), Panel C the effect of quitting at 45 to 54 years of age (effect shown from the age of 50), and Panel D the effect of quitting at 55 to 64 years of age (effect shown from the age of 60). Survival probabilities have been scaled from the NHIS to the U.S.

Rates of death from all causes at these ages for 2004, with adjustment for differences in age, educational level, alcohol consumption, and adiposity (body-mass index). The horizontal dots represent years of life gained. For smokers who quit at 25 to 34 years of age (median, 29), survival curves were nearly identical to those for participants who had never smoked, meaning that those who quit smoking gained about 10 years of life, as compared with those who continued to smoke. Survival curves were somewhat worse for smokers who had quit at 35 to 44 years of age (median, 39) than for those who had never smoked; still, smokers who quit smoking could expect to gain about 9 years of life, as compared with those who continued to smoke.

Thus, cessation at about 39 years of age reduced the excess risk of death from any cause by about 90%. Nevertheless, smokers who had quit by about 39 years of age still had a 20% excess risk (hazard ratio, 1.2), as compared with those who had never smoked. Although this hazard is substantial, it is much smaller than the 200% excess risk (hazard ratio, 3.0) among those who continued to smoke ( Figure 4 Risks of Death for Participants Who Continued to Smoke and for Those Who Quit Smoking According to Age at the Time of Cessation. The total and excess risks of death are shown for NHIS participants who continued smoking, as compared with those who quit smoking. CI denotes confidence interval. Smokers who stopped smoking at 45 to 54 years of age and those who stopped at 55 to 64 years of age (median, 49 and 59 years, respectively) gained about 6 and 4 years of life, respectively. Even cessation at the age of 45 to 54 years reduced the excess risk of death by about two thirds.

Since some of the smokers who died might have quit smoking as a result of the disease that eventually killed them, the hazard ratios for former smokers might be biased upward (and the benefits of cessation might be even greater than shown). Exclusion of the first few years of follow-up would help limit this “reverse causality,” but when we excluded the first 2 years of follow-up from the analysis, the results were similar (data not shown). Discussion The overall mortality among smokers of both sexes in the United States is about three times as high as that among otherwise similar persons who never smoked, and the smokers lose, on average, at least a decade of life. The women in this cohort represent the first generation of women in the United States in which those who smoked began early in life and smoked for decades, and the risks of death for these women are about 50% greater than the risks reported in the 1980s studies. For both female and male smokers, the tripling of the relative risk of death and the reduction in survival by at least a decade are similar to the risks in four other studies: a study of male British doctors born between 1900 and 1930, the large U.K. Study of women born between 1930 and 1950, a meta-analysis of several other U.S.

Cohort studies, and a study in Japan of people born between 1920 and 1945. Although the relative risks were similarly tripled across the studies, the absolute death rates (for both current smokers and those who had never smoked) were much higher in our study than in other U.S. Studies, since the NHIS is more representative of the general U.S. Thus, in the NHIS, the large absolute differences in risk between current smokers and those who never smoked, as well as the gains in years of life for those who quit smoking, are likely to be true for the U.S. Population as a whole. The hazards associated with smoking are substantial, even though in recent decades, most smokers in the United States have smoked cigarettes with relatively low levels of tar, as measured by machine testing, as compared with the cigarettes smoked in earlier decades. Twenty-first-century measurement of the hazards of tobacco use must take into account the substantial reductions in mortality from vascular diseases and in overall mortality since 1970.

As death rates among those who never smoked have fallen, the absolute differences in survival to the age of 80 years between those who continue to smoke and those who have never smoked have widened and now exceed 30% for both sexes. Moreover, the hazards among women who continue to smoke now approximate those among male smokers, at least in middle age. Because the absolute risks of continuing to smoke are large, the absolute benefits of cessation will also be large, particularly as death rates among those who have never smoked continue to fall.

Cessation at around 40 years of age results in approximately a 90% reduction in the excess risk of death associated with continued smoking in later middle age and old age. That is not to say, however, that it is safe to smoke until 40 years of age and then stop, for the remaining excess risk of about 20% (hazard ratio, 1.2) is substantial; it means that about one in six of these former smokers who dies before the age of 80 years would not have died if their death rates had been similar to those for persons who had never smoked who were similar in educational levels, adiposity, and alcohol use. From 1965 to 2010, the prevalence of cigarette smoking among adults in the United States decreased from 42% to 19%, owing in large part to increased rates of cessation.

Although former smokers still far outnumber current smokers at older ages (and especially among men) ( ), the United States has about 35 million current or future smokers under 35 years of age, and the prevalence of smoking changed little from 2004 to 2010. Our study has some limitations. First, there may be confounding factors other than the few variables recorded in the NHIS. However, most of the excess mortality among smokers was from neoplastic, vascular, or respiratory diseases that other studies have shown can be caused by smoking, and adjustment for educational level, alcohol use, and adiposity did little to alter the hazard ratios, suggesting that, to a large degree, the association between smoking and mortality is causal. Second, the NHIS excludes incarcerated adults (who tend to have an increased prevalence of smoking ). This should not, however, materially affect the observed differences between current smokers and those who never smoked, among the adults surveyed in the NHIS. Third, the number of deaths in the NHIS was lower than that noted in recent studies, but this is counterbalanced by the fact that the surveyed population and death rates in our study are generally representative of the U.S.

Population and death rates. Fourth, misclassification of the causes of death, particularly at older ages, might affect the observed hazards for some causes of death (lowering the risks for some causes but raising the risks for others), but this would not affect our analyses of all-cause mortality. Fifth, the NHIS is a cross-sectional survey, and data on smoking status were collected only at baseline. Some of the surveyed smokers would have quit subsequently, thereby somewhat reducing their risk, but with 7 years of follow-up, any distortion of the hazard ratios should be slight.

Similarly, the excess mortality among former smokers might be overestimated, since some deaths may well reflect deaths among smokers who quit because they became ill. In this case, the true gain of life-years from the time of cessation would be somewhat greater than we estimated.

Finally, although the smokers who quit smoking might have been more likely than those who had never smoked to try to improve their health, we found little difference between these two groups with respect to alcohol use, adiposity, and other health-related variables. Our findings, as well as those from other recent prospective studies, highlight the worldwide importance of tobacco control. About 40 million Americans smoke, but most of the world's estimated 1.3 billion smokers live in low- and middle-income countries. Worldwide, about 30 million young adults begin smoking each year (about 50% of young men and about 10% of young women), and current patterns of behavior suggest that most will not stop. Our findings are consistent with emerging evidence from China and India that cigarette smokers worldwide who continue to smoke can expect to lose about a decade of life. In most high-income countries, there are now more former smokers than current smokers; however, cessation remains uncommon in low- and middle-income countries. Thus, on the basis of current rates of smoking initiation and cessation, smoking, which killed about 100 million people in the 20th century, will kill about 1 billion in the 21st century.

Options to help increase cessation rates and decrease initiation rates worldwide include higher prices for cigarettes through an increased excise tax, restrictions on smoking in public places, bans on tobacco advertising and promotion, public education about the hazards of smoking and the benefits of cessation, and easy access to cessation efforts. In the United States, the recent increase of 62 cents in the federal excise tax on each pack of cigarettes, a recent federal mass-media campaign, and the extension of insurance coverage for cessation as part of the Affordable Care Act are likely to raise cessation rates. A focus on cessation of smoking is justified, since quitting smoking before the age of 40 years, and preferably much earlier, will reduce by about 90% the decade of life that is lost from continued smoking.

Smoking is associated with a decade of lost life, and cessation reduces that loss by about 90%. Supported by a grant (TW007939-01) from the Fogarty International Center, National Institutes of Health; by a grant (IEG-53506) from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; and by the Disease Control Priorities Project, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Jha holds an endowed faculty position at the University of Toronto. The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinions of the agencies at which the authors are employed. Provided by the authors are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org. We thank Samira Asma, Tom Frieden, Howard Hu, and Arthur Slutsky for useful comments and Jennifer Parker for assistance with the NHIS data.

Source Information From the Center for Global Health Research, Toronto (P.J., C.R., V.L.); the Food and Drug Administration, Rockville (B.R.), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Hyattsville (R.N.A.) — both in Maryland; the American Cancer Society (M.T.) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (T.M.) — both in Atlanta; and the Clinical Trial and Epidemiology Services Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom (R.P.). Address reprint requests to Dr. Jha at the Center for Global Health Research, St. Michael's Hospital, and Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5C 1N8, Canada. References • 1 MPOWER: a policy package to reverse the tobacco epidemic.

Geneva: World Health Organization, 2011. • 2 Tobacco smoke and involuntary smoking: IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2004.

Avoidable global cancer deaths and total deaths from smoking. Nat Rev Cancer 2009;9:655-664 • 4 Peto R, Lopez AD, Boreham J, Thun M, Heath C Jr. Mortality from smoking in developed countries, 1950–2000. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 1994. • 5 Peto R, Lopez AD, Boreham J, Thun M. Mortality from smoking in developed countries, 1950–2005.

• 6 Department of Health and Human Services. The health consequences of smoking: a report of the Surgeon General. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 2004. • 7 Forey B, Hamling J, Hamling J, Thornton A, Lee P. International smoking statistics 2006-2012.

Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press, 2002. • 8 Quitting smoking among adults -- United States, 2001-2010. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2011;60:44-49 • 9 Prevalence of coronary heart disease -- United States, 2006-2010.

MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 20-1381 • 10 Rostron B. Smoking-attributable mortality in the United States. Epidemiology 2011;22:350-355 • 11 Mehta N, Preston S. Continued increases in the relative risk of death from smoking. Am J Public Health 2012;102:281-286 • 12 National Health Interview Survey. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, June 2010 ().

• 13 Ingram DD, Lochner KA, Cox CS. Mortality experience of the 1986-2000 National Health Interview Survey Linked Mortality Files participants. Vital Health Stat 2008;147:1-37 • 14 National Health Interview Survey (1986-2004) Linked Mortality Files, mortality follow-up through 2006: matching methodology.

Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, May 2009 (). • 15 Pencina MJ, Larson MG, D'Agostino RB.

Choice of time scale and its effect on significance of predictors in longitudinal studies. Stat Med 20-1359 • 16 Jha P, Jacob B, Gajalakshmi V, et al. A nationally representative case-control study of smoking and death in India.

N Engl J Med 2008;358:1137-1147 • 17 Doll R, Peto R, Boreham J, Sutherland I. Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctors. BMJ 2004;328:1519-1533 • 18 Peto R, Beral V.

Sir Richard Doll CH OBE: 28 October 1912-24 July 2005. Biogr Mems Fell R Soc 2010;56:63-83 • 19 Pirie K, Peto R, Reeves GK, Green J, Beral V. The 21st century hazards of smoking and benefits of stopping: a prospective study of one million women in the UK. Baud Port Checker Rar Download.

Lancet 2012 October 26 (Epub ahead of print). • 20 Thun MJ, Carter BD, Feskanich D, et al. 50-Year trends in smoking-related deaths in the United States. N Engl J Med 2013;368:361-374 • 21 Sakata R, McGale P, Grant EJ, Ozasa K, Peto R, Darby SC. Impact of smoking on mortality and life expectancy in Japanese smokers: a prospective cohort study. BMJ 2012;345:e7903-e7903 • 22 Hoffmann D, Hoffmann I.

The changing cigarette, 1950-1995. J Toxicol Environ Health 1997;50:307-364 • 23 Thun M, Peto R, Boreham J, Lopez AD. Stages of the cigarette epidemic on entering its second century. Tob Control 2012;21:96-101 • 24 The hazards of smoking and the benefits of stopping. In: Tobacco control: reversal of risk after quitting smoking. IARC handbooks of cancer prevention, Vol.

Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2007:15-27. • 25 Giovino GA, Mirza SA, Samet JM, et al. Tobacco use in 3 billion individuals from 16 countries: an analysis of nationally representative cross-sectional household surveys. Lancet 2012;380:668-679 • 26 Ritter C, Stover H, Levy M, Etter JF, Elger B. Smoking in prisons: the need for effective and acceptable interventions. J Public Health Policy 2011;32:32-45 • 27 Peto R, Chen ZM, Boreham J.

Tobacco -- the growing epidemic. Nat Med 1999;5:15-17 • 28 Jha P, Chaloupka FJ. Curbing the epidemic: governments and the economics of tobacco control. Washington, DC: World Bank, 1999. • 29 Baumgardner JR, Bilheimer LT, Booth MB, Carrington WJ, Duchovny NJ, Werble EC. Cigarette taxes and th.

CHRISTIAN ROCK: Blessing or Blasphemy? By Terry Watkins TO THE READER: On this tract we're going to examine Contemporary Christian Music. Before I was saved, rock music was my life.

A former rock guitarist, (and yes, I still play the guitar) I know the love for rock music people have. But I also know the source and effects of rock music. I have spent thousands of hours researching rock music.

Music is very important in the spiritual life of a child of God. And the wrong music can spiritually destroy the child of God. I ask you to prayerfully obey, 1 Thess. 5:21-23, ' Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Abstain from all appearance of evil. And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.'

We also have a Christian Rock: Questions and Answers page and a Bible Guidelines for Christian Music(link available at end), in which, we answer many of the questions readers have asked. We provide Biblical and documented answers to the following questions, and more: • Are you doing this because you don't like rock music? • What gives you the right to judge the CCM artists? • Aren't you causing divisions among Christians? • Aren't you doing more harm than good attacking other Christians? • What's wrong with using rock as a tool to reach young people?

• What about the 'thousands' of people getting saved at CCM concerts? • How can you reach lost young people with the 'old' hymns?

• Didn't Martin Luther and General William Booth use bar tunes in their music? • Why should the Devil have all the good music? • But aren't you limiting God? • But isn't music neutral? • Isn't it better for Christians to listen to Christian rock than Secular rock?

• What about soft-rock music like Steve Greene and Twila Paris? • How can CCM lift up the Lord Jesus and yet be wrong? • Have you contacted the CCM artists according to Matthew 18:15? • Will listening to 'rock music' send me to hell? Blessed Assurance, Jesus is Mine, Dial-the-Truth Ministries NOTICE: Throughout this tract are links to various pictures and RealAudio sound clips.

Some of this � you just have to see and hear! When you see links with a image; it is a picture link. When you see links with a image; it is a RealAudio sound link. You will need the free RealAudio player for the sound clips. If you do not have the RealAudio player you can The reader is encouraged strongly to explore these links � '...

Prove all things;' 1 Thess. 5:21 IMPORTANT: Any copyrighted resource material used throughout this article is the ownership of the original copyright holder. It's use here is for non-profit, research and educational purposes. It's use here complies fully with the 'Fair Use' privilege under the U.S. Copyright Act of 1976. In the early 1950's, Cleveland disc jockey Allan Freed, revolutionized the music world... Borrowing a ghetto term for sexual fornication, he coined the term 'ROCK N ROLL'.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica Yearbook for 1956 described rock'n roll as, 'insistent savagery... Deliberately competing with the artistic ideals of the jungle.' The Christian community cried against this 'tool of Satan.'

But in the 70's, a sinister hand began planting a small, but deadly seed. And the walls began to crumble. And like a raging hurricane, rock began desecrating the sacred music of the church.

In they came; Bill Gaither, the Imperials, Dallas Holmes, Randy Stonehill, Keith Greene, and others. Today, rock music is a common companion of the church.

And as you'll soon read; the rebellion, the sexual theme, the blasphemy, the occult influence, are found 'lurking under the cover' of Christian rock. Amy Grant The queen-bee of Christian rock is Amy Grant. Amy's song, 'Baby, Baby', was unprecedented in Gospel Music history topping the chart as the number-one spot on Billboard magazine. Is the secular world 'turning on' to Jesus? Not hardly... People magazine (July 15, 1991 p.71) says of, 'There's saintly Amy cuddling some hunky guy, crooning 'Baby, Baby' into his ear and looking pretty SLEEK AND SINFUL...' After all, Amy confesses, 'I'm trying to look SEXY to sell a record...'

( Rolling Stone, June 6, 1985 p. 10) The Bible says in 2 Timothy 2:22, 'Flee also youthful lusts:', but Amy says, 'Petting happens... As a teenager, when I gave part of me to someone, I knew I was just going to flirt, HAVE A LITTLE FUN,...' (Bob Millard, Amy Grant, (New York, 1986),p. 30) Amy says in Ladies Home Journal (December, 1985, p. 100), 'I have a healthy sense of right and wrong, but sometimes, for example, using foul, exclamation-point words among friends can be good for a laugh.' Amy says, 'Why isolate yourself?

Your life isolates you enough. I'm isolated when I walk into a room and somebody says, She's a Christian and NOBODY OFFERS ME A JOINT and all the coke (cocaine) disappears...' (Bob Millard, Amy Grant, (New York, 1986), p. 169) Husband Gary Chapman confessed in People magazine (July 15, 1991 p. 72), of a six-year cocaine and marijuana addiction! Amy also says, 'I remember years ago — the first time I smelled anybody smoking a joint at a concert, I WAS THRILLED... It meant to me that obviously this person is not affected by the church peer pressure.'

(Bob Millard, Amy Grant, (New York, 1986),p. 30) On, Amy is dressed in a red robe, (used in witchcraft rituals) flashing on the palms of her hands, a six-pointed-star — A HEXAGRAM! Sean Sellars, a fomer satanist on death row, for sacrificing 3 people to Satan, says in his book Web of Darkness (p.51), the hexagram 'is said by some to be the most powerful and evil sign in satanism and of all the occult world. The hexagram is used mainly in witchcraft to summon demons from the underworld. The word hex which means to place a curse on someone, originated from this sign.'

And the primary point of contact in the transmission of spirits — is the hand! One of the most widespread and best known satanic signs is the I1 Cornuto, also known as the 'satanic salute' and the 'horned hand'. It is made by, making a fist and extending the first (index) and last (pinkie) finger.. The satanic salute is displayed by satanists to acknowledge their allegiance to Satan. Anton LaVey, displays it on the back cover of The Satanic Bible.

The satanic salute is popular in rock music. And on the (Reunion Records, 1985) video tape Amy Grant clearly flashes the 'satanic salute'!

And it is NOT the sign language for 'I love you', where the thumb is openly extended! Amy delibertely flashes the 'satanic salute' at least two separate times on the video, displaying it for several seconds!

Is Amy Grant a satanist? Absolutely NOT! But there is a definite spirit invoked in rock music, secular or Christian — and it's NOT the Holy Spirit! And many times, people involved in rock music get 'caught up in this unholy spirit'! During a 1993 Ophrah Winfrey interview, Michael Jackson, explained the reason for some of his fithly sexual gestures during his concerts: 'It happens subliminally. IT'S THE MUSIC THAT COMPELS ME TO DO IT. You don't think about it, it just happens.

I'M SLAVE TO THE RHYTHM.' (The Evening Star, Feb. A10) It's NOT the lyrics! It's the MUSIC! How can the Holy Spirit of the Bible use fleshly music! 'For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these ARE CONTRARY THE ONE TO THE OTHER: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.'

Galatians 5:17 Amy's album, House of Love includes the environmental-mother-earth song, Big Yellow Taxi, by new-age-priestess — Joni Mitchell. Time magazine, (December, 16, 1974, p.63) tells of Joni Mitchells intimate relationship with a muse (a demon spirit) named Art. Joni says, 'I feel like I'm married to this guy named Art, I'm responsible to my Art above all else.' Some of the words to Big Yellow Taxi, 'They paved paradise and put up a parking lot'.

How different from the words of the Lord Jesus in Luke 23:43, 'And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise. Of course, what's the Bible and Jesus got to do with 'CHRISTian' rock? Amy's latest album, Behind the Eyes goes even further to 'exorcise' any Christian influence. Christianity Today (12/8/97), in article entitled, 'Where's the Gospel?' , writes: 'Amy Grant's latest album has thrown the Contemporary Christian Music industry into a first-rate identity crisis... Grant's newest release, Behind the Eyes, comes as no surprise given the course of her career since Unguarded (1985), the first of her albums to be distributed jointly by CCM label Myrrh in the evangelical market and A&M in the mainstream market. Previous 'crossover' projects, however, had made at least some mention of God or Jesus.

The complete absence of explicitly Christian lyrical content on Behind the Eyes has renewed a debate in the CCM industry about what constitutes Christian music.' (Christianity Today, Dec., 8, 1997, 'Where's the Gospel?' ) CCM has gotten so far off the track, Amy, admitts in Christianity Today, she doesn't even know what Christian music is, 'I DON'T KNOW if Behind the Eyes is a Christian record.

Being able to label it Christian or non-Christian is not the point for me.' CCM is in such as worldly, compromising, money-making, confusing, mess � it's 'number-one-star' does NOT even know if her album is Christian!

CHRISTian is a disciple of Jesus Christ! If it's not about the Lord Jesus Christ � it is NOT CHRISTian! A music buyer for religious stores mentioned in Christianity Today, truthfully says of Behind the Eyes, 'It's NOT a Christian album.

A Christian album should be clear on the person of Christ, and these lyrics are not.' Christianity Today, makes a keen observation, as it emphasizes that, incrediably, some songs by secular performers are more Christian than CCM's! Christianity Today asks the following enlightening question, in reference to secular, Mary Chapin Carpenter's, 'I Am a Town' � 'If Carpenter can sing, 'I'm a Baptist like my daddy, Jesus knows my name,' why does Grant have to be so discreet about her faith?'

Very good quesion... Why does CCM have to be so discreet about their faith? Why does a supposedly Christian NOT want to sing about the Lord Jesus Christ?

The German reformer and musician, Martin Luther puts it bluntly - 'whoever does NOT want to song and speak of it shows that he does not believe it'. According to Luther � they're NOT saved!

'We should praise God with both word and music, namely by proclaiming [the Word of God] through music...He who believes earnestly cannot be quiet about it. But he must gladly and willingly sing and speak about it so that others may come and hear it.

And whoever does NOT want to song and speak of it shows that he does not believe it.' (Don Cusic, The Sound of Light, p. 15) Because of Grant's (and CCM's) obvious UNChristian lyrics, Christianity Today, writes: 'The Christian music industry has been unsure how to categorize Grant's latest offering, so much so, in fact, that the GMA and Christian Music Trade Association (CMTA) initiated a re-evaluation of existing guidelines for GMA Dove Award eligibility and sales chart placement.'

Not to dare break their 'compromising-wordly-commercial-track-record', GMA, did allow Grant's Behind the Eyes in the Dove Awards � and 'presto' � Behind the Eyes was the 1998 Dove Award's, Pop/Contemporary Album of the Year! Stan Moser, former head of Word Records (the man responsible for signing Amy Grant) and CEO of Star Song Records, was one of the pioneers and most important executives in CCM. And after 26 years in CCM, in November 1995, walked away from CCM.

In an article in Christianity Today, titled 'We Have Created a Monster' about CCM, Mr. Moser freely admits: 'But to be candid, I look at the majority of the music I hear today and think it's virtually meaningless.'

(Christianity Today, 'We Have Created a Monster', May 20, 1996 p. Moser goes on to make this eye-opening statement: '...I would probably be more inclined to call the industry 'commercial Christian music,' rather than 'contemporary Christian music.' ' (Christianity Today, 'We Have Created a Monster', May 20, 1996 p. 27) CCM artist, Michael Card, admits that much of CCM - is NOT Christian: ' The lyrics of a good number of the songs don't betray anything specifically Christian - they may have some moral message, but not a lot of the big songs are identifiably Christian... ' What happens to the message when we start getting the music to as many people as possible?'

There is an essential part of the gospel that's not ever going to sell. The gospel is good news, but it is also bad news: 'You are a sinner, and you are hopeless.' How is a multimillion-dollar record company going to take that?

That's a part of the message, too, and if that's taken out - and it frequently is in Christian music - it ceases to be the gospel.' (Can't Buy Me Love, Christianity Today, May 20, 1996, p. 25) Michael Card, makes this alarming statement about CCM: 'The direction and value system are getting worse faster than any of us can imagine.'

(Can't Buy Me Ministry, Christianity Today, May 20, 1996 (p. 22) Sandi Patti Following the footsteps of Amy is Sandi Patti. Sandi Patti is the highest paid Gospel entertainer in the world,averaging $75,000 for a two-hour performance (Don Cusic, Sandi Patti, (New York, 1988),pp.

211-212) (not to mention profits from T-shirts, records, etc). At $37,000 an hour, who is Sandi Patti really serving? God or mammon?

Jesus Christ said in Matthew 6:24, 'No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other;... Ye cannot serve God and mammon.' Sandi's album, LeVoyage, is so rock oriented CCM Magazine (May 93 p.40) says '...

Old-line Patti fans are either going to be seeking refunds in droves, or be so flabbergasted at seeing an entirely new side of her....' And of course, the wonderful name of Jesus is nowhere to be found.

Out of over 2000 words — the name of Jesus is nowhere to be found! What do these so-called CHRISTian stars have against the wonderful name of Jesus? You would think a real Christian would want to tell the whole world about Jesus! What a difference from the disciples (some REAL Christians) in Acts 5:42 says, ' And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.' According to Christianity Today (September 11, 1995 pp. 72-74) Sandi Patti was committing adultery with Don Pesli as far back as 1991!

And the article (p. 72) also stated that, 'According to several independent sources who at different times were aware of Patty's activities, she took part in two extramarital relationships, in both cases with married men.' A large part of Sandi Patti's career — she was committing adultery with married men! How could the Holy Spirit possibly bless her music! Rather than do what the Bible commands (after all, what's the Bible got to do with it.) and get her previous marriage right with God, as her first husband wanted, — Sandi's adulterous appetite 'wrecked' two families. And on August 6, 1995, after divorcing her first husband, she married Don Peslis.

No wonder the name of Jesus wasn't on her last albums! Anyone living in such gross sin would have a hard time singing about sinless Jesus! 2 Timothy 2:19, '... Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity.'

PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter gives the following Biblical analysis of Sandi's lying and adultery: A recent World magazine article (September 16, 1995) states: Ms. Patty, who claims to have been in counseling since 1989, attributes her pattern of 'keeping secrets' to her childhood molestation, the memory of which she recovered in therapy. The article reveals that prior to her divorce Patty was already involved in an adulterous relationship with Don Peslis, a former backup singer. Patty and Peslis both divorced their spouses and are now married. According to a Christianity Today article (October 23, 1995, p. 89), 'Patty also admitted to another adulterous relationship.' The subtitle of the World magazine article is: 'Gospel singer Sandi Patty confesses to adulterous affair.'

The title of the article is 'She did it her way.' Yes, she certainly 'did it her way,' but it was not God's way. God's way is not committing adultery or lying; nor is it God's way to destroy two families and to stand as a horrible testimony to the world and to the children involved. Psychotherapy may have made her feel better about herself while disobeying God and destroying her family. It may have given her some bogus excuses at the time. And, perhaps it's helping her rationalize the pain she has caused others.

That's not God's way. ( PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, Nov.-Dec. 1995 p.8) Combine the sinful heart with the sinful flesh and you have the adultery and lying that have characterized Sandi Patty's life....

Patty's rising popularity is indicative of the trashed condition of Christians who claim the name of Christ but will not follow the doctrines of the Bible. Marrying a partner in adultery does not make the relationship right.

It constitutes a continual condition of disobedience to God. How does one repent of adultery while one continues in an ongoing relationship with a former accomplice in adultery? Sin is further compounded while it festers under the lackly sanctions of a compromised institution.... By God's standards Sandi Patty simply moved from adultery into a sinful divorce and then into marriage with her adultery partner, who divorced his wife.

( PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, March-April 1998 pp.1,8) To read the articles by PsychoHeresy Awareness on Sandi Patty in their entirety, which also provides information into Sandi's unbiblical 'memory psychotheraphy'. Matthew 16:13-23 has an amazing dialogue, between Jesus, Peter and Satan: 13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? 14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. 15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not REVEALED IT unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on eart youall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. 21 From that time forth began Jesus to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. 22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

A few interesting things about Matthew 16: In verse 17, Peter had a direct revelation from God — '...for flesh and blood hath not REVEALED it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.' Again, notice God 'REVEALED' it unto Peter. But look what happens in verse 23! Just seven verses later! Jesus addresses Peter as Satan! Satan had completely taken over Peter!

Notice — God 'revealed it' unto Peter, but Satan 'completely took over'! Peter became a third-party when Satan TOOK OVER! Here's how some of the secular rock stars describe this 'taking over': 'It�s amazing, �cause sometimes when we�re on stage, I feel like somebody�s just moving the pieces... I�m just going, �God, we don�t have any control over this.' Stevie Nicks, Fleetwood Mac '.it's like I'm on automatic pilot.

Someone else is steering me — I'm just along for the ride. I become possessed.' Angus Young, AC/DC ( Hit Parader, July 1985, p.60) 'When I hit the stage it�s all of a sudden a �magic� from somewhere that comes and the spirit just hits you, and you lose contrnl of yourself.' Michael Jackson That is not the Lord! The Lord 'reveals' truth but He doesn't 'take over'. You don't become a third party when God is working!

Here's what Sandi Patti says: 'I know this is going to sound a little WEIRD, but many times when I�m onstage I feel that I�m kind of a THIRD PARTY to the whole thing, just standing back and watching what�s going on. I feel that the Lord is singing through me... ' (Don Cusic, Sandi Patti, 1988, p.214) That is not the Holy Spirit Sandi Patti is talking about!

Notice something else in Matthew 16: Peter's motive. As Jesus began in verse 21 to tell how He would be crucified, verse 22 reads, 'Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.' What was Peter's motive? It was his LOVE FOR THE LORD JESUS! He didn't want Jesus to be crucified! And even though Peter's motive was RIGHT — when he got out of the will of God — Satan COMPLETELY TOOK OVER!

You can have the RIGHT motive (even love for the Lord Jesus Christ!) and be completely WRONG and under control of Satan! Sincerity and motive is no substitute for the WILL OF GOD! These Christian Rock stars may have the RIGHT motive (which I seriously doubt) but nobody but a 'spiritual fool' could think rock music was the direct will of God!

The secular world knows who is the 'god of rock.' Rock star David Bowie said, 'Rock has always been THE DEVILS MUSIC.' (Rolling Stone, Feb. 83) Secular rock bad girl Lita Ford, said, 'Listen, rock�n roll AIN'T CHURCH. It�s nasty business. You gotta be nasty too. If you�re goody, goody, you can�t sing or play it...'

( Los Angeles Times, August 7, 1988) Even secular Time magazine, (March 11, 1985 p.60) in an article about Contemporary Christian Music titled the article, 'New Lyrics for the DEVIL'S MUSIC'. Only backslidden, carnal Christians, who refuse to yield to the Holy Spirit, could ever think rock music was the will of God. The Lord Jesus Christ said something else in Matthew 16 that is very interesting... According to Jesus, Satan 'glorifies' men: 'But he [Jesus] turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, SATAN: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of MEN.' Matthew 16:23 According to the Lord Jesus Christ - Satan glorifies and uplifts man!

According to the Lord Jesus Christ the following comments and quotes are from Satan: dc Talk: Here's how Dallas Morning News, (April 27, 1996) describes a DC Talk 'Freak Show' concert: 'As teenagers' shrieks filled the Dallas Convention Center moments before dc Talk took the stage Friday night, one of the relatively few grown-ups in the sold-out crowd observed, 'This is just like the BEATLES.' Smith Smith's concerts are filled with teenage girls who 'scream out their affection for him' (not the Lord Jesus Christ). Here's how Inside Music, Jan/Feb 91, describes a Smith concert: 'His concerts draw hundreds of thousands of fans each year, mostly teenage girls who scream out their AFFECTION FOR HIM non-stop throughout.... To his fans, Smith is the absolute greatest there is, BAR NONE...' CCM artist, Michael Card, admits this glorifying of man in CCM: 'Now, the industry is celebrity-driven.

The song is almost irrelevant. The focus is on the PERSON, and songs have become disposable.' (Can't Buy Me Ministry, Christianity Today, May 20, 1996 (p. 22) Did you know this CCM-man-worship is ABOMINATION to the Lord? Did you know, 'for that which is HIGHLY ESTEEMED among men is ABOMINATION in the sight of God'? And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is ABOMINATION in the sight of God.

Luke 16:15 Here's how CCM mag introduces it's review of Sandi Patty's, 'after-adultery', album, 'Artist of My Soul' - read it and weep - what is now called Christian Music is nothing but Satanic MAN-worship: 'The press kit arrived today packed full of superlatives and more than 1200 square inches of plush photography. The singer looks to her right and smiles pleasantly as the breeze teases nicely coiffed blond hair. Her arms are thrown wide as she gladly embraces the moment. This is, after all, something of a comeback.

Open the lavish 9-inch by 12-inch publicity folio. Inside, the singer smiles up at you from a photograph a foot-and-a-half wide. Open the folder again and a photographic panorama spreads three-feet wide across the desk. On the left 18 inches, she's outside, same setting, still smiling, gazing skyward.

To the right, indoors, under amber light, hands lightly clasped, eyes downcast, she strikes a contemplative pose. Nestled inside the press kit, enfolded by all those smiling photos, are the words--the P.R.--and the PRAISE [DTTM; Praise of Sandi Patty - NOT the Lord Jesus Christ - according to Matthew 16:23 - this is Satan - read Matthew 16:23 if you do not believe it!] is effusive. [DTTM effusive means: pouring freely, excessively, gushy, that is the PRAISE of Sandi Patty] The singer has created 'a distinguished work of art.' Her voice is 'distinctive,' her songs 'eloquent and articulate,' the CD 'masterfully crafted' and 'breathtakingly performed.' She's a 'preeminent talent,' who is 'critically acclaimed' and 'highly successful' -'stirring' with 'remarkable musical diversity' and an 'expansive vocal range.'

She is the recipient of five Grammy Awards, nine Grammy nominations, 35 Dove Awards ('more than any other artist'), three platinum records, five gold records. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.' (CCM Magazine, January, 1998) AND GOD SAYS THAT IS ABOMINATION! That which is HIGHLY ESTEEMED among men is ABOMINATION in the sight of God'. Luke 16:15 Michael English In 1994, Michael English swept the Gospel Music Association's Dove awards, winning six awards, including the prestigious artist of the year. But a few days later, English confessed to an affair with Marabeth Jordon of the Christian rock trio First Call.

When their 'pleasures of sin for a season' (see Heb. 11:25) was over — two families lay in ruins. And how did Michael English respond to his 'caught in the act'? Did English show any Christ-honoring-repentance? Not hardly — he's opening for the secular group Foreigner! By the way, have you seen the cover of? With long hair, and goat-tee, a la Nirvana — the look of rebellion is openly flaunted.

People say, 'Yea, but look at David's sin'. Yea, but look at David's repentance! Just read Psalms 51, 51:1-3 'Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.

Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. Compare that to Sandi Patti having not one, but two extramarital affairs for several years, and after 'getting caught' rather than putting her previous marriage back together, she marries her 'partner in crime'. And English forsaking Christians and opening for secular-lustful Foreigner!

Jesus says in Matthew 7:20, 'Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. Smith One of the most disturbing performers is Michael W. The 'idol' of screaming young Christian girls, Inside Music, Jan/Feb 91, says, 'His concerts draw hundreds of thousands of fans each year, mostly teenage girls who scream out their AFFECTION FOR HIM non-stop throughout.... To his fans, Smith is the absolute greatest there is, BAR NONE...' THE ABSOLUTE GREATEST THERE IS, BAR NONE —Can any honest person who has remotely read the Bible — possibly believe God the Holy Spirit is involved in Smith's idol-worshipping music? What a mockery of the Lord Jesus Christ, who 'made himself of no reputation' (Philippians 2:7).

Compare Smith to John the Baptist who said in John 3:30, 'He must increase, but I MUST DECREASE'. Or the Apostle Paul in 1 Cor. We are made as the FILTH OF THE WORLD, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day.' Jesus said in John 12:43, 'For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.' On the back of Smith's album — BACKWARDS! A common satanic practice, taught by satanist Aliester Crowley (Crowley is very popular in the rock music world).

Crowley gives instructions to the satanist: '...train himself to think BACKWARDS by external means, as set forth here following. (a) Let him learn to write BACKWARDS... (b) Let him learn to walk BACKWARDS... (c) Let him... Listen to phonograph records REVERSED (d) Let him practise speaking BACKWARDS... (e) Let him learn to read BACKWARDS...'

(Aleister Crowley, Magick In Theory And Practice) Having counseled teenagers in satanism, I know one of the first signs of satanic influence is writing backwards! But something even more frightening appears on the album... The M in Michael and the T in Smith is part of the Runic (runic means secret) alphabet used in witchcraft and satanism!

Only someone involved in the occult would know such an alphabet exists! In the book, Web of Darkness, former satanist Sean Sellers says, 'Runes are the oldest form of occult knowledge and magic... Their use sets a person against God.'

(Sean Sellers, Web of Darkness, p. 72) Inside Music magazine, (Jan/Feb 91, p.23) interviewing Michael W.

Smith, said, 'There's also the influence of such groups as Alan Parsons in your music. It's especially noticeable on the first record, the Michael W. Smith Project (named after Alan Parsons's album, The Alan Parsons Project).' And Smith's reply, 'DEFINITELY!'

Alan Parsons is among the most occultic in rock! Alan Parsons has songs titled: 'Lucifer', the blasphemous 'Genesis Ch 1 v32' (there is no Genesis Chapter 1 verse 32!).

Alan Parsons, album, Eye In The Sky on the cover (and back) is the Eye of Horus (also called the Eye of Lucifer). Not surprisingly, Smith also has an album titled, I2(EYE). Of course, the name of Jesus is nowhere to be found (did you really think it would be?) Michael W.

Smith's album, Change Your World, has 2819 words — Jesus occurs — ZERO! Smith's album, I�ll Lead You Home, has 2046 words —: Jesus occurs — ZERO! Compare that to the Apostle Paul (a REAL Christian) in just the first chapter of 1 Corinthians: verse 1 Jesus Christ verse 2 Christ Jesus, Jesus Christ our Lord verse 3 God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Verse 4 Jesus Christ; verse 6 Christ verse 7 our Lord Jesus Christ: verse 8 our Lord Jesus Christ. Verse 9 his Son Jesus Christ our Lord.

Verse 10 our Lord Jesus Christ verse 12 Christ verse 13 Christ verse 17 Christ.the cross of Christ verse 23 Christ crucified verse 24 Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Verse 30 Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: The party-line of the Christian rockers is they're trying to reach the young people with the gospel of Jesus Christ by using rock as a tool. But how are they going to reach them with the gospel of JESUS CHRIST when they won't even mention HIS NAME?

Here's what a secular reporter in the Birmingham News wrote after watching a Michael W. Smith concert: 'If you weren�t familiar with Michael W. Smith�s standing in the world of contemporary Christian music, you might attend one of his concerts and come out none the wiser.' ( The Birmingham News, Feb. 5c) After a albuhour performance, there is not even enough of God for the lost world to even know these 'so-called CHRISTian stars' are Christians! What a pitiful excuse for a Christian! Shame on you Smith!

These young people are looking at you for help and inspiration and you ol'backslidden-carnal-coward, you won't even mention the name of the ONLY HELP in this universe that can help them! Many of these young people are from broken homes, shattered lives, facing tremendous peer-pressure, begging for something REAL and you will not even mention the ONLY REAL HELP in the universe!

Shame on you! The Bible is very clear! A Christian should be separated from the world. Paul says in 2 Cor. 6, 'Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate,...' Ephesians 5:11 says, 'And have NO FELLOWSHIP with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.'

These Christian stars not only fellowship with 'the unfruitful works of darkness' but guess who produced and played on Michael W. Smith's album 'I'll Lead You Home' — Patrick Leonard! In case you don't know who Patrick Leonard is, he's also the producer for the queen of slut — Madonna! Maybe Smith and Madonna can do a duet of Smith's Love Crusade '.let's get on the love crusade.' As far as Christian sanctified living which the Bible commands, here's what Smith has to say: '...you�re always going to have those very very conservative people.

They say you can�t do this; you can�t do that,... You can�t drink; you can�t smoke;... It�s a pretty bizarre way of thinking.' Smith ( The Birmingham News, Feb.

1993, p.1B) Hey, Smith — of the ten commandments — eight were ' THOU SHALT NOT.' But, why do you keep bringing up the Bible — what does that have to do with it? Carman Webster dictionary defines 'blasphemy' as 'lack of reverence for God.' Blasphemy saturates Christian rock, such as the blasphemous 'humor' of Carman Dominic Licciardello, better known as Carman.

His blasphemous, street-jive, dialogue between John the Baptist and Jesus Christ as teenagers on his video Live... Radically Saved is digusting! Here's a sample of Carman's blasphemy: JOHN: 'Hey man, Hey cuz, Whatchoo doin man? I ain't seen you in a long time.

(John calling Jesus baby!) Jesus turns and says, 'Hey, what's up, John?' See, Jesus is always cool; he's always together. He's got his thing together, y' know, Then Carman blasphemously imitates the Lord Jesus Christ walking hip-jive doing what Carman calls 'THE MESSIAH WALK'. JOHN: 'This is wild, brother, now I don't know.

Man, I never had anybody in my family MAKE IT BIG...' Jesus 'MADE IT BIG'?

Jesus Christ died a curse for sinful man! 3:13, 2 Cor 5:17! Jesus Christ was 'despised and rejected of men' (Isa 53:3). Is 'MAKING IT BIG' being beaten, smitten, spit upon, mocked and crucified?

Video is some of the lowest BLASPHEMY I've ever seen! In the video, Carman portrays the Lord Jesus Christ as a confused street hippie, while the pharisees and apostles are black street gang members! The crucifixion takes place, not on Calvary — but in a back alley gang fight!

The Lord Jesus Christ is buried in a GARBAGE DUMPSTER. And naturally Carman includes the occult (Carman's videos are soaked in occult imagery!) as satanic tarot cards tell the Calvary story! Carman's PERVERTED humor is the lowest BLASPHEMY I've ever heard!

And God's people defend this blasphemous trash! I believe in humor and fun as much as anybody — BUT NOT AT THE EXPENSE OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST! On Carman's 'The Standard' album is the sacrilegious (at least!) 'Who's in the House', in which Carman crudely, refers to the Lord Jesus Christ as 'J.C.' : You take Him high You take Him low You take J.C. Wherever you go Now tell me, who.who.who.who.who.who?

Tell me who's in the house? Tell me who's in the house? Tell me who's in the house? Tell me who's in the house? Jesus Christ is in the house today Now, in your wildest dreams, could you possibly imagine the Apostle Paul referring to the Lord Jesus Christ as J.C.?