WHAT I CAME TO BELIEVE

Hi!

Since some are now again questioning whether or not

my faith is real and are attacking me personally (and

that includes those who say they are Christian), I am

reposting this, so that these folks know where my posts

come from and maybe, if they're honest, they'll

understand my true motives and stop trying to insult me

and stop trying to get people to think I am not a real

pastor, because that is the only way they think they

can avoid answering to the points I have made.

This is a friendly message and I am not even looking

for a debate, nor even a response. I just wanted to

share how I came to believe what I do.

Anyway, here it is...

I would ask that if you don't have some time right now

to sit down and really go over this material, that you

mark it for later reading, since I wrote a lot of text

and there are some web links with a lot of text, that

really need to be read fully and carefully and

prayerfully, as I hope you will my entire post.

This is about truth and should be enough motivation

for folks to take the time to sit down and study this.

Or have we all become so arrogant now, that we

think we can't be wrong, or can't learn anything?

Or has it just become an annoyance to study?

You get the point.

I would also ask that you really be open to what is

said here and read it without preconceived notions.

I am NOT issuing a challenge here, but I am open

to further discussion about this, as long as they

understand the following:

1) This message is not a challenge. It is a statement

of my beliefs and what I have experienced.

2) I will not entertain a war.

3) Insults and snippage do not equal proof. They

only prove that you know that you can't back up

your beliefs Scripturally.

4) You can use historical data in your comments,

but other than that, you must prove your point

Scripturally.

5) Do it in your own words. Posting web links designed

to tie me up for days, will not even be read. I post

some here, but I am not challenging anyone. I am

simply stating my beliefs, what I have experienced

and am providing some historical data. In fact, I

hope no one "challenges" these beliefs, but rather,

seeks to discuss and learn what my beliefs are and

why, Scripturally, I believe them. Or have we lost

all desire for discussion?

Anyway, on with the message...

I am not a Preterist, as some accuse. As anyone who

knows me knows, I do not accept any labels, accept that

of a Christian and a Pastor. I do however, agree with

much of what various Preterists say, as I can easily see

it in the Scriptures. It also resolves a huge problem that

I had with the "end time prophecies" that were floating

around. Before getting into that, we should first consider

what these end timers (many of them good, Godly Christians,

who do not intend to do harm, yet do) do to atheists and

Christians. The following are a couple of responses I sent

to end timers, who had nothing left and resorted to name

calling, that deal with the damage I believe these end

timers do to both believers and unbelievers.

http://endtimers1.notlong.com

http://endtimers2.notlong.com

Getting back to myself, I had a real problem with

reconciling Matthew 24:34 with the end time views

that are floating around.

In fact, I would say that more Christians leave the church

and more preachers leave the pulpit over that verse, than

any other thing. We all know what it actually says and we

all know that we're just trying to find a way to get around

what Jesus said there, adding our own words to it, or

trying to change the definition of the word, even though

the original Koine Greek says what it says and even though

translators who are themselves Futurists, still translate it

the way it reads. We all know, folks. So let's get honest!

"Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass,

till all these things be fulfilled." - Matthew 24:34

People try to claim it means "race", or "the generation

alive when those things take place", etc., but those

don't jive with the text and we all know that it isn't

common sense. The fact is, the people hearing it

wouldn't have taken it that way and these end timers

seem to believe that Jesus would have spoken in

a way that would only make sense to people in the

20th & 21st century. That's ridiculous! He keeps

everyone until now ignorant? Please! That's arrogance

and vanity, plain and simple! Jesus told THEM, "...it is

given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom

of heaven...". Would He say that and then NOT tell them?

It also doesn't sit right, with the following verses...

"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father

with his angels; and then he shall reward every man

according to his works. Verily I say unto you; There

be some standing here, which shall not taste of death,

till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."

- Matthew 16:27-28

Some of them would be alive and some would be dead when

it happened, period. He said, "some STANDING HERE".

Re: Mat 24:34: How now brown cow?

Was it something other than His return in judgment that

He was talking about? If it is, remember, it has to jive

with everything Jesus said!

Is the Transfiguration what He was talking about, as some

have claimed? No, sorry, none of them had died yet, so

that doesn't wash. We don't even need to examine the

rest of the events that He said would happen.

Was it Pentecost? No. At Pentecost, only one of them died

and there was no coming with the Father's angels, and no

"rewarding every man according to his works", etc.. So that

can't be it.

And let's take a look at it with Revelation 22:12 quoted,

which no one disputes is about the return of Jesus and

see how the wording matches.

"For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father

with his angels; and then he shall reward every man

according to his works. Verily I say unto you; There

be some standing here, which shall not taste of death,

till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom."

- Matthew 16:27-28

"And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me,

to give every man according as his work shall be."

- Revelation 22:12

He was talking about the same event in both Matthew

and Revelation and He said that some standing there

would see it happen!

Anyway, I felt I had to resolve this and throw aside every

interpretation of Scripture that I had read, since it

bothered me for years and frankly, I never preached on

the subject of the end times and avoided it as best I could.

I was honest and told people I didn't have an answer for

them and introduced them to the various interpretations

and the ups and downs of them.

It seemed that disproving each one of the end time doctrines

was pretty easy and that proving even one of them couldn't

be done Scripturally. And every time I sat down with

another minister and we would discuss it, I would ask them

why they believe what they do. They would talk about the

Rapture and this and that and point to a couple of verses.

I would also point to a couple of verses in response (not

just the "generation" ones) and ask how that could be, if

these verses say "such and such". There was always silence

in response and if there was more than one there, I would

see the look of confusion and doubt come over their faces.

Now they had heard a Scriptural response, instead of a

"made for TV movie" response, for lack of a better way

of putting it. It seems that these good Christian men

were not educated in what the Bible says about it, but

rather, what the doctrine that they believe says, based on

books and movies written by other men who started and

continue these doctrines. That further added to the weight

I felt.

Some may think I was being argumentative, but I really

was hoping someone could answer my questions. After

a while, I did start to look for the silence and the looks

of confusion, because I was increasingly feeling that if

no one could answer these questions, then it couldn't

possibly be a doctrine from the Lord. At some point,

it did become a kind of a test as well as a journey,

seeking an answer from someone, anyone.

I.e., someone please answer this and if you can't,

I will note that. But I don't think that's arrogance.

We're supposed to test doctrines and note when

they cannot be supported Scripturally, are we not?

In fact, skipping ahead in time, I just recently had

a discussion with a pastor I have known for years

and went over the passages regarding New Jerusalem

and showed him how they say that it is symbolic of

the bride (church) being wed to Christ and that it is

not a physically literal city (I will post that if anyone

wants me to).

He opened his Bible, read it with me and unlike people

in these groups who try to pretend it doesn't exist and

run away, he was honest about it and agreed that yes,

it did say that. However, he did also said; "Well, we

still believe that there's a literal aspect to it.".

I asked him; "Why would you, if the only things it shows,

is that it's a symbolic representation of the bride being

wed to the Lamb (Christ)?".

He had no answer. But he still chooses to believe what

he believes. Now I love this guy! He is a great man of

God! But I must be honest and say that he is choosing

to believe it, because it's what he likes to believe. It

makes his flesh feel good, to think that he won't have to

leave this body and this world forever. But now he knows

that what he believed about the city is not Scriptural and

therefore, it is sin for him to continue in it and I hope

that he sees that. That is the next thing he must do.

Realize that. And hopefully he will and it will lead to

conviction and a desire to change to be the same as

what Scripture says.

Anyway, back to the story...

So I decided that I could not get a solid answer from

the Christian community, which was steeped in these

end time doctrines. Yes, I must go it alone. But was

I really alone? Wasn't the Holy Spirit supposed to be

my teacher anyway? It seems that these Godly men,

who I do believe to be sincere Christians, were not

relying on the Holy Spirit, but on other men for their

beliefs (unintentionally, I'm sure).

And the fact is, that whether they want to admit it or not,

Christians today do NOT learn what they know from

studying the Bible! They are taught a doctrine and told

the Bible says this or that and then shown a few out of

context verses and believe it and all of their "study" from

that point on, is based in that format. They are simply

trying to further what they were told and they are also

taught that to reject what they were told, is to reject

God and His Christ and His word. It's really sad!

That's called cult like brainwashing! No offense, it

simply is and if we weren't talking about what YOU

believe, you would readily agree with me and that

should tell you what you need to know, to be honest

with yourself about it. This method has even been

admitted to here in these groups, when the issue was

pressed. I just didn't want to do things that way and

that's why I had avoided the end times issues, because

I tried to prove them Scripturally, without a preassumed

doctrine and just couldn't do it! Sure, I could read verses

their way, but they only read that way when you first

assume the doctrine and as I have pointed out to many

folks, they DO add their own words to it, when they

describe what they claim it means. So no, the verse

doesn't say it. THEY say it, because that's what they

were already told it means!

I didn't want any part of that. There is nothing wrong

with learning from other Christians, but aren't we

supposed to be Bereans about it? Hey look, I gave

one commandment in a church I pastored in, or even

preached in and I called it that, because I accept no less.

Do NOT automatically believe everything I say! BE A

BEREAN! These men were not educating themselves

as to what the Scriptures say! As much as they love

the Lord, on this specific issue, my statement is true.

At least they are not being diligent about it.

There is one thing I learned a long time ago. If we

remain ignorant to the history and lifestyles, manner

of speaking and way of thinking of the people in the

times that are written about, we can never fully

understand Scripture. I.e., how many of you know

to take the Bible in context and yet, don't take it in

the context of the time it was written in?

Let me give you a quick example of understanding

something in the context of the times and the way

of life of the people at that time and how the modern

church misinterprets the Scripture, being ignorant of

the history involved...

Romans 12:20-21

20) Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he

thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap

coals of fire on his head.

21) Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with

good.

The modern church misunderstands the "coals of fire"

passage. While people today tend to think of it as a

way of making the other person feel guilty and think

it's some kind of metaphor, it was actually a blessing!

In those days, they didn't have matches. Therefore,

it could be extremely hard to get a fire going. For

this reason, fires were kept going constantly. But in

the event that one did go out, quite often, one would

borrow some burning coals from their neighbors and

carry them to get their own fire restarted, in order to

keep warm, or cook, etc.. And of course, they carried

them home like they would anything else. On their

heads (with proper insulation, I'm quite sure ).

Therefore, to "heap coals of fire on his head" simply

meant to give them plenty of coals to get their fire

going with and was actually quite a kind act, meant

to bless the person, not make them feel disgusted

about themselves!

Now, when you line this up with what Jesus said...

"But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them

that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and

pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute

you." - Matthew 5:44

....you can see that to have the attitude of making them

feel bad, would be the opposite of what Jesus taught,

so the traditional interpretation given by the modern

church (an oxymoron), does not line up correctly with

what Jesus said. How does one, "bless someone who

curses them", if they are out to "burn their head"?

And remember, since Christians state that they believe

in unconditional love, why do they advocate taking this

passage to read as "burning someone's head", meaning

to heap guilt upon them?! (:

So you see, either way, the modern church misuses

this Scripture. And if you read the next verse (v21),

Paul says, "overcome evil WITH GOOD". He was

comparing how we should respond to evil, to a kind act

one did for their neighbor in those days, not as a means

of making them feel guilty and that lines up perfectly

with the verse I quoted with Jesus' words above. Yet

people today don't even see that to believe what the

modern church teaches, is to have Paul contradicting

Jesus! Yet they are quick to condemn my belief,

because it doesn't line up with what they are taught

by these same modern churches! (: The fact is,

we absolutely must look at the Scriptures from

the point of view of the first readers and we can

only do that with a serious study of the people

who wrote it, which I have just proved, amen?

Imagine people 2,000 years from now, trying

to understand our slang if they heard it and our

way of living and how we thought about things,

without a dictionary and without studying us at all

and then pretending to be able to interpret it all

properly.

Would that wash with you? Of course not!

So why do you do that now? Hello???

Anyway, you understand now what I am saying about

knowing the historical context and not ignoring history,

when reading Scriptures which were, btw, written at

that point in history and should make sense to those

reading it when? That's right, at that point in history.

While we can understand it also, some research into

their times is proper. Remember, we can benefit from

God's word, but it was NOT written TO us.

So anyway, I could not continue in this darkness about

these passages and what all this end time stuff meant.

One day, I ran across a book written by Gary DeMar,

called, "End Times Fiction". It seemed interesting,

even if only to know how to destroy another false

argument. During each chapter, I thought this guy

was nuts. I mean off his rocker. A raving lunatic.

I wanted to put the book down and not even finish it.

I thought it was too crazy to even deserve a read.

You see, like the end timers now, I ignorantly asked,

"But if it's not about these days, then what good is

the Bible?". I thought that to give up that idea,

meant to give up the Christian faith altogether.

Boy, was I wrong!

Anyway, something kept me picking it up again a few

minutes later and I noticed, after two chapters, that

at the end of each chapter, lo and behold, he tied it

all together so nicely that a pretty bow automagically

appeared on it.

So, after continuing to read this book WITHOUT BIAS

(remember, I started out thinking the guy was crazy)

and finishing it and reading it again, I then decided

that this was an avenue that had to be investigated,

so I did. I also realized, that in all of my studies

about the Jewish people and their way of speaking,

writing and living, which involved years of study,

I had never really paid more than passing attention

to the events that lead up to the destruction of

Jerusalem. I mean, in order to capture my attention,

it needed photon torpedoes and phaser banks a firin'.

Btw, Kirk's the man and I don't care what any of

you think!

I decided that not only had I not studied those specific

years with any real substance, I also had not been

diligent in my studies of the Roman Empire (frankly

it bored me in school and after seeing Caligula a little

later in life, it really turned me off, so I didn't pay it

much attention either, until recently). So I decided

to study that too.

I also did some geographical studies of the area in

question at different points in history (which was

immensely helpful) and read works by Josephus,

as well as other historians, including secular ones

(which never bear the same weight as Scripture,

but can be useful) and after all of this, I started

comparing these historical evidences to the Scriptures.

I have always believed that one simply cannot properly

understand the New Testament, without being well

versed in these things and in the Old Testament, so

I started researching in the Old Testament, prayerfully

and carefully, putting myself in the position that I don't

know what is right and that maybe everything I had

heard and had been taught was wrong and that the

Lord would reveal it to me through His Holy Spirit,

if I approached His word without any doctrinal stance

at all, except that we are saved through Christ.

I found a lot of things that I had never noticed before.

I have studied the Old Testament quite a bit and I have

read the entire Bible through fifteen times and the New

Testament too many times to count and yet, I just never

noticed them! I couldn't believe how much I missed

and when I got to the New Testament, I almost smacked

myself for not seeing what it clearly says, over and over

and over! I think some of it is due to bad translations

of certain words. For example, many times when the

Bible is translated as saying, "shall be", it actually, when

literally translated, says "is about to be". But whatever

the case, it's still there and so many Scriptures made

so much more sense to me. It was unbelievable!

Especially when I started looking at extremely literal,

word for word translations, instead of ones in which

the translators decide what it means and then translate

it that way.

Let me give you a quick example of what a translation

can hide from you...

You all know the story of Paul standing in front of Paul

standing in front of Felix, making his defense, in Acts 24.

When I read that, I always wondered why Felix was so

afraid, that he actually trembled. Sure, Paul talked about

judgment, etc., but Paul also knew that Felix knew about

this stuff, because as he told Agrippa, it was, "not done

in a corner".

Anyway, I wondered why Felix got so afraid. It wasn't

because Paul was talking about a Resurrection and a

Judgment that would "one day, 2,000 years from now"

happen. And as the Bible tells us, Felix had knowledge

concerning this issue (Acts 24:22). It was, looking at

the original Greek, because Paul told him that it was

ABOUT TO HAPPEN. Let's look at the text...

Acts 24:14-15,25 [KJV]

14) But this I confess unto thee, that after the way

which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my

fathers, believing all things which are written in the

law and in the prophets:

15) And have hope toward God, which they themselves

also allow, that there shall be a resurrection of the

dead, both of the just and unjust.

25) And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance,

and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and answered,

Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient

season, I will call for thee.

Now reading it above, it doesn't sound as I said.

However, going back to the Greek, we see that

the words, "shall be" in v15, should actually read,

"is about to be"", or a close proximity of that.

Check the LITV, for example, which is a literal rendering...

V15: having hope toward God, which these themselves

also admit, of a resurrection BEING ABOUT TO BE of

the dead, both of just and unjust ones.

That is why Felix was so scared. Paul was saying

it was about to happen!

Check this verse in Acts, also from the KJV and note

that the same Greek word is used, as in Acts 24:15

and note that it did come to pass shortly after it was

said, since they note that it did happen in their time.

"And there stood up one of them named Agabus,

and signified by the Spirit that there should be great

dearth throughout all the world: which came to pass

in the days of Claudius Caesar." - Acts 11:28

The word wreaks of immanency, not a prolonged wait

and when you define immanency as meaning that it

could happen at any time in the future, no matter how

far off, you've really made it mean nothing.

And these people with their "1,000 years = 1 day

to God" garbage, are nothing more than Bible twisters!

Do they apply that supposed rule uniformly? Or only

when it's convenient for their doctrine?

Is it even stated as a rule? Of course not! Peter was

just telling people to be patient! And they skip over

the part in which he notes that he was saying that

they were in the last days! he was responding to

a letter that said that mockers had come and were

mocking Christ's return, saying, "Where is the sign

of His coming?". Peter responded by saying that

"in the last days, mockers shall come". Well, there

the mockers were! thus, Peter was telling them,

"You should have been expecting this, since you

knew that in the last days, mockers would come.".

Hebrews 1:1-2 tells us that they were in the last days

back then. And when shown this, the end timers in

these groups try to claim, "Well, they started then,

but they are still going on now.".

What happened to all of their cries about, "We're the

generation that is in the last days!". How come they

weren't saying, "All generations are in the last days

since Christ!". because they know better and because

they know what that word "generation" means in

Matthew 24:34, no matter how they try to wiggle

out of it when shown the truth, by making things

up on the fly and pretending that they always believed

in those things!

Hebrews 1:1-2 puts them in the last days and 1 John 2:18,

which was written after Hebrews, does place them in the

"last hour". Now how did they go from "the last days"

to "the last hour" within that short time and then have the

last hour take almost 2,000 years and still counting???

So what they really believe, is not that 1 day = 1,000 years

but that 1 hour = 2,000 years! <laugh!>

I'll tell you one thing... I no longer have that nagging

feeling in me, that uneasy, unrestful feeling, that

something just isn't right with what's been going on

and the fact is, that if you do your research, you'll find

that this pre-Trib belief, for example, was invented in

1830. It is not the historic belief of the church and

I will not believe, for example, that no one was able

to get it right, until computers were invented, because

God really meant to talk about a computer chip in

peoples' hands! John wrote to the people he wrote to

and he told the readers to understand what he wrote

and they would never have come to that conclusion!

Therefore, it's false. Let's use some common sense

here folks.

I do not buy into the notion that if Jesus was talking

about events that already took place from our perspective,

that the Bible is of no use. All that says, is that if the

Bible isn't about YOU, then it isn't useful. That is

vanity, shot up from the launching pad of ignorance

and I was guilty of it too.

God said, "Thou shalt not kill". Is that no longer useful?

God said that we should not worship Molech. Is that

passage still not useful, to teach us not to worship

false gods, simply because we don't see Molech around?

Jesus said, "Love your enemies". Is that not still useful?

How dare they tell me my Bible is useless, because

I don't believe in their fictions!

No, I will not buy into that vain notion. I can point to my

Bible and show people how Jesus' prophecies were fulfilled

to the letter. Can you? Honestly, CAN YOU? It seems to

me, that makes my Bible more useful to me, than yours is

to you, if you believe what these people claim (and they

do and have done it here, in messages to me).

And what do the people in each generation, who claim

that the Bible is all about them and that they are the

chosen generation (who take the attitude of it being of

no use unless it's about them), say about those who came

before them? I guess the Bible was useless to previous

generations, right? I mean, if it wasn't about them and

that would mean it's useless, then the only logical

conclusion is that the Bible was only useful to the Apostles

and then no one, until this generation, no? The silence

from them is deafening, when this is pointed out! At most,

they'll respond by saying, "No one said that!". Oh, but you

did, because there's nothing left to conclude and I note

that you could not tell me how it was useful to them.

One man responded and said, "It helped them look forward

to us". Well, how nice for them! The fact is, that the

past generations were preaching that THEY were the chosen

generation (what happened to their claim that "generation

= race?) and they were not saying, "Hey guys, we get to

look forward to those people in the future being the ones!".

So that leaves that argument out and where did John say

to understand that they were to look forward to this

generation? He didn't say that anywhere!

You see people, it's a load of garbage, straight from the

pit of Hell! And where does it say, "nuclear weapons"

in the Bible? Oh, that's right, it doesn't. So the writer

was writing in terms that people of that day could

understand, you say? Understand what? They never

would have thought of nuclear weapons and the very

writer that you are saying this about, told the people

to understand what he was writing and that those

things "must shortly take place", so that's ridiculous!

Some of these people even claim we shouldn't be bothered

with peace, but should help bring the end times on. Now

how is that possibly compatible with, "Love thy neighbor"?

It's a doctrine from Satan, folks!

Revelation was not predicting something thousands of

years off. It was written prior to 70 A.D. and was

confirming the words of Daniel and Jesus. And there

is a ton of evidence that Revelation was written prior

to 70 AD and only one comment made a long time later,

which can be translated two ways, as either "it was seen"

(the Revelation) in 95 AD, or as "he was seen" (John)

in 95 AD. And that is the truth, folks!

This "end times" garbage is just that... garbage!

The "last days" already occurred in the generation

that was alive when Jesus walked the Earth. To

say otherwise, is to serious twist the Bible. In fact,

the word that many Bibles translate as "world", is

not the Greek word for "world" (kosmos), but rather,

for "age" (aion). It is talking about the end of the age

and Revelation talks about a war on a certain "region"

(ge), which comes from another Greek word and not

a global war.

But they also want us to believe the following...

Daniel was told to seal his book until "the time of the

end" (Dan 12:4). Jesus appears on the scene some

600 years later and we both know that there is no

doubt that Jesus is discussed in Daniel.

I agree with them there. What you don't see, is that

if Daniel discussed Jesus and Jesus came some 600

years later, the logical conclusion is that the "time of

the end", also called, "the last days", came some 600

years after Daniel saw the vision and wrote the book,

since Daniel associated "the time of the end" with the

appearance of the Messiah. And note that it doesn't

say "the end of time" and so we should ask; "The end

of what then?", instead of assuming the end of time

and the planet (see Ecc 1:4). That's when the book

was supposed to be unsealed. When the Messiah

appeared.

And Jesus did unseal Daniel, even quoting Daniel 12,

which people claim has yet to happen and He applied

it to Himself and His time.

But yet, they also want us to believe the following...

That Revelation is discussing some unknown time,

which every generation lately, seems to be claiming

is their time and that they are in "the end time",

contrary to what the Book of Daniel clearly says

will be the "time of the end".

Yet, in Revelation, John is told specifically NOT to seal

his book, because "the time is at hand". And somehow,

this equates the end being over some 2,000 years or

more away.

Huh?!?

Daniel is told to seal his book, because 600 years has to

go by and John is told NOT to seal his book and that,

"THE TIME is at hand" because 2,000 years or so has

to go by? Huh???

Does that make ANY sense whatsoever?!

I have provided here a few links.

Please read the entire web page, slowly, carefully and

prayerfully, when viewing these links. Thanks!

Notes to remember while reading them...

Note: The Temple was torn down stone by stone,

to recover the melted gold.

Note: The Sun was typically used as a symbol to describe

God's light and the Moon as a symbol of Israel, which

reflected God's light onto the Earth, just as the Moon

reflects the light of the Sun.

The Beast, 3 1/2 Yr & Tribulation:

http://www.ecclesia.org/truth/beast.html

Jerusalem (what happened?), the baby & dating Rev:

http://hellbusters.8m.com/prophecy/realizedeschatology.htm

More Jerusalem Terror Info & Matthew:

http://www.pbcc.org/sermons/morgan/1138.html

Thanks for taking the time to read this. I do not pretend

to have all of the answers. I just thought I would share

some information. May God bless you in your studies

of this subject and guide you by His Holy Spirit, that

lives within we who believe. Amen!

--

Exchange between Marge and Geoffrey the butler

on "Fresh Prince" (both African American):

Marge: "My brother, you have been oppressed,

repressed and suppressed. Don't you know

you can be free?"

Geoffrey: "I have known freedom. I don't like

the health plan."