This page is under construction

Marlene Hammersmith



This page has been composed to clarify what I see as misinformation stated to be fact, by Marlene Hammersmith, a preacher who presented the first of about half a dozen sessions on "Daniel, more than a lion-tamer" at a summer school in January 2013, run by the Modbury Church of Christ in Adelaide's north-eastern suburbs.

Here are several minutes I have transcribed from a speech of hers, aupposedly part of biblical teaching. She currently rents premises provided by the Anglican church of St. Matthew's in an eastern Adelaide suburb. One wonders if the minister there is aware of the nature of her teaching. It seems very difficult to make contact with that church by telephone - my personal experience.


Here is a text rebuttal, phrase-by-phrase.

There is a CD rebuttal with links to each track on the next page.

I was uncertain if the speaker was accredited to preach by the Churches of Christ, and also whether the beliefs of Zionism are part of the beliefs of the Churches of Christ. I attempted to clarify that with the headquarters of the church and discovered to my dismay that they had no idea what Zionism was, and asked me to explain in minute detail.

I found it rather surprising to discover that Mrs. Hammersmith was not accredited to preach by the Churches of Christ - a church which promotes lay ministry on its website - they giving the reason "because she was not a minister". As someone acceptable to preach in several other denominations myself, as a layman, this seems to go against the concept of "The Priesthood of All Believers" that the Churches of Christ say they support. Denominations in which I have been offered the pulpit casually include Assemblies of God, Anglican, Baptist, Christian and Missionary Alliance, and Uniting, and on a roster at a Christian and Missionary Alliance and Uniting.

Zionism (which is a totally political movement founded by Theodor Hertzel in 18-something in Austria, after whom the city/dormitory suburb of Tel-Aviv's Hertzelyia is named), is as irrelevant to Christianity as the British-Israelite views which permeated the Elim wing of Pentecostalism (known in Australia as the Christian Revival Crusade) decades ago, and the prosperity gospel as taught by the Assemblies of God here up to the present time, including much of the "Word of Faith" doctrines which developed from Saskatchewan in 1948 and later.

The Word of Faith cultish so-called gospel (largely heretical and mind-controlling, demanding total obedience to the head guru whose words one may not challenge) is, as one would expct, right behind Christian Zionism. It's "prophet" is John Hagee, amply supported by authors popular in some Christian circles such as John Bevere who is known for his close working relationship with Brian Houston of what is now called Hillsongs, a world-wide empire which prospers well on its sales of books and DVDs, as does Mr. Bevere.

Considering that, then, it is not surprising that promoters of Zionism in churches should dismiss any challenges to Zionism as irrelevant, using the well-worn (Old Testament) "silencing doctrine" of "Touch not the Lord's Annointed" which biblically can be resolved by asking "Are YOU sure you are the Lord's annointed? Or do you just say you are?"

Actually, I have subscribed for many years to a very basic Pentecostal print magazine started around the time the heresies rampant in the Australian AoG under Andrew Evans and Brian Houston first came to light. The magazine is called CETF - "Contending Earnestly for the Faith" (which is a quote from Jude's epistle) - and there is a remarkably well-timed quote on page 4 of August 2013 issue (3rd part of a 3-part series "Judge Not" by Michael Bigg).

Having been part of an active management team since 1997 on an IRC chat channel run by "real" evangenlicals in the true meaning of the word, we continually promoted the apostle Paul's admonition about gospel topics set in stone - "In all things essential (ie salvation), UNITY". "In all things non-essential (for example Zionism), DIVERSITY".

We must NEVER make an "-ism" necessary to accept in order to be acceptable ourselves. That is how I may disagree with some of the stuff they publish. Interesting, yes, but someone else's personal ideas do not make me disobedient to a guru's directives. Nor do they make you disobedient either.

However after an interview that ran from 2pm to 6.45pm recently, every attempt was made to coerce my wife and me into submitting to their "greater knowledge". Hello! That is gnostism as well, isn't it?

It is generally accepted by people who have studied Zionism with an open mind (do a google search) that Christian Zionism has a link to Jewish Zionism (for which the Jewish Zionists - while having little respect for Jesus Christ - are very grateful for pressure being brought to bear by an increasing number of Christians OUTSIDE OF THE MIDDLE EAST to support their ambitions - to provide both a moral and financial support for Jewish Zionism - with "political clout" in (initially just American) government lobby groups, although it seems few "religious" Jews have much truck with the movement.

One would think that if Jews were serious, they would all be in the Holy Land ensuring Hertzel's home-land ownership ideas were supported by them. But they aren't, are they?

Nor were they when Cyrus the Great allowed three waves of Jewish slaves in Babylon to return "home", were they? Something that Nehemiah and others found to their cost. They seemed to enjoy their captivity, becoming quite affluent according to history.

This is why, of course, that there were many Jews in Iraq at the outbreak of the first Gulf War, after all.

Let us remember, too, that the Jews as a people ceased to exist at the time of the Babylonian captivity, and they have NEVER been free in their own lnd since 800-odd BC either. Think about it. They were "owned" by other nations continully, or had citizenship rights in those other nations much more recently.

Proseletizing converts to Christian Zionism is frequently done by people who do not actually understand the historical inaccuracies described here and in Zionist literature.

One needs question if Mrs Hammersmith's beliefs and outspoken views promoting Zionist Judaism as a necessary Christian belief are appropriate for a person who appears to be in a shepherding role in a country congregation in the Churches of Christ (after viewing their website and her own "ministry" website), given the inaccuracy she presented in what should have been a simple historical outline of what happened during the very well documented outcome of the period leading to the closure of the British Manadate over Palestine in May 1948 - a topic that was not relevant to what she had been hired to preach about - unless it was to make a case for an agenda which is neither shared by all Jews, nor by all Christians.

It appears Mrs Hammersmith asked the pastor and his wife - who are all personal friends - if she could include her flawed history lesson in setting the scene, so this writer's gut feeling was right in his assumption that she was presenting an agenda starting at this point. It seems that neither the pastor nor his wife had any intimate knowledge of middle-east history - hence the verbal attack on this writer for daring to think differently, and now eight months down the track I discovered that the pastor's wife is Jewish (by ancestry through her maternal side) - which answered his undocumented (until this time) conviction since the time of the "onslaught".

There is a page of links here, so you have no excuse to say "I didn't know that". God Himself has said that He will reply to many who say "I have taught in your name, and I have cast out stuff in your name" and His reply will be "I didn't ever know you".

Please be warned.

I decided to pen these opening thoughts because immediately after the morning church service I attended at which the preacher was Mrs Hammersmith, presenting the first episode of her series, I was accosted in the foyer by a member of the congregation who approached me wearing a big smile, saying "Was that great? Or was that great?" or something similar.

It would have been fine if it had stopped there, but in my attempting to explain that while I was interested in the preamble, I suddenly realised the totally changed history being presented was part of the Zionist agenda, but I was shouted down by this person, who was someone important in the leadership hierarchy of the church.

I tried to explain, quietly, that the speaker had continually rewritten historical facts (known to many including me and my family because of military involvement in the region) concerning the establishment of the the new nation known since 1948 as Israel on land the United Nations had taken by force, many being existing occupants since 71AD, and dispossessing them. This was an act of the world government set up after World War 2, replacing the failed post-WW1 “League of Nations”, whose aim had been to ensure laws were fairly established, a point of reference for a sort of "Judgement of Solomon" so to speak.

As an aside, regarding the name chosen by Zionists for their desired nationality, one would have thought that "Judah" would have been more appropriate than Israel, the biblical name for the apostate Northern Kingdom pre-Babylonian exile era, which was rejected by God, and well described in the Old Testament historical sections in Kings, Chronicles, Judges, etcetera.

But that is not relevant here, nor is the fact that it is generally commented that the Zionist claim to what they called “their homeland” was based upon scriptural promises made by the God in which a majority did and do not believe.

Christians need recognise that “In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek”, a quote from the apostle Paul. Christians also need not lean upon Judaism for validity because they are neither Jew nor Greek themselves.

Yes, God has things to say about His chosen people, banished 10 times in scripture, and who have only returned nine times. Yes, God shall restore them, but in His timing, and according to His ways, not man's rules.

Sadly, the person who attacked me in public denied my right to present any explanation for my disagreeing with their unhistorical thoughts, my being publicly informed in an escalating volume level of conversation that they were without argument right, and I was similarly wrong for no reason other than because I disagreed with them, all this in front of perhaps 50 people talking quietly in the foyer while holding coffee cups and eating biscuits.

Subsequently an apology was received over the argument that occurred. It was disputed that it was in the foyer, but that is neither here nor there. It was in the foyer and the man who plans the "lock-up roster" was able to stop the argument dead by cutting across the tirade, saying "Richard, have you remembered you are on lockup duty?". I was able to escape. And that was in the foyer. There has been no attempt to retract personal discrediting remarkas about my views being valid as a Christian, nor the fact that when I left the cult the person couldn't identify, some thirty years before, I studied and was part of a travelling team involved in "debugging cult teachings".

In fact I was asked twice during this lengthy interrview "how long have you been a Christian". You may be surprised, but these people pull all the stops out to discredit someone who has different non-essential beliefs that conflict with theirs.

Unfortunately, this was next accompanied by personal accusations that I had inherited baggage from a previous "cultish" belief system prior to my becoming a Christian – and strangely they didn't even know which one it was of several, trying two and getting them both wrong. In their view, someone in a cult is apparently unable to "get back on track", being branded for the rest of their life (or so it seems) as a person whose beliefs and thinkibg are ar best unreliable.

At that point, I stopped saying anything, and resolved to borrow the CD of the sermon during the intervening week, and listen back to exactly what the speaker had said, in case I had mis-heard.

I hadn't.

So, here on the next page, are the remarks in question, made by Marlene Hammersmith, directly from the sermon recording, as she presented them, starting about 11 minutes in on her 34-minute message with 3 or 4 minutes of unhistorical misinformation presented by her from the pulpit - both to the students she teaches, and to the congregation of the church I was attending at the time.

What is sadder is that the person attacking me has not seen fit to apologise, perhaps regarding their rebuke as necessary for my soul, confirming in the ears of those overhearing the attack, that they were right in their accepting a false version of history, and doctrines which are baseless in Christ.

The thunderous applause at the end of the lecture (rather than sermon) had made it quite clear that the audience had accepted her message as truth and fact, lock, stock and barrel.

What to do with the audio production created here will depend upon the initial reaction of a handful of people who would have absolutely no idea how I at 78 got to the point of creating a response.

The only time I have previously made such a challenge to tell the truth was from an ABC on-air interview in 1987 with a Latter-Day Saint High Priest where I explained where he, too, had an agenda. That recording I made had the surprising effect of stopping the conversion process of a couple of people to heretical beliefs, some twenty-five years ago. I believe that my thinking might have become acceptable to this self-appointed expert who didn't believe in history if she had bothered to read that earlier rebuttal here.

On the next page on this site, I'll continue with the dangerous teachings of this lady who has a "teaching ministry" that denies the true historical account of the end of the Palestine mandate. I shall quote in context from the recordings made at the time, and her teaching was all in the presence of the church's pastor and his wife, both of whom are acredited minsters of the Churches of Christ in South Australia. However the pastor's wife, who ffectivly runs the church - although unqualified as a minister because she did not complete the ministry course she attended with her husband, and was never ordained a minister although he was, insisted tht she accompanied her husband to my house and harrangued my wife and me for close to FIVE HOURS one afternoon in November 2013. How do I know this? She and her husband said so in front of a witness from the church.

This is a typical exzmple of "Our Way Church" as one can read in the many pages written about the "Battered Sheep Syndrome" evident in many, many, so-called evangelical churches.

Then, in a challenge to me, Mrs Wardle referred to the statement by Paul the apostle that "in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek", and without realising she had convicted herself out of her own mouth, she made two incredible statements showing her belief flawed.

The first was that "my grandmother was Jewish" (the Jewish line goes through the female side which is likely the reason the gospel narrative describes the angel Gabriel visiting Mary, the mother of our Lord)

Then, she and her husband admitted (as I had correctly assumed, but not discussed), that they had given their close personal friend Mrs Hammerstein "carte blanche" to push the non-Christian Jewish POLITICAL platform from the pulpit of a Church of Christ' using her agenda-driven lies across.

Yes, they are lies (by definition, and please red my phrase-by-phrase explanation), even though she very likely was unaware that what she was teaching was factually and historically incorrect and untrue.

From experience one recognses cult teachings where those promoting a theme will usually have accepted their teachings from another "guru", lock, stock and barrel.

A point I have always made when preaching is "do not accept my words - nor those of anyone else standing at a pulpit, as truth without checking what is said with scripture and history". One suspects Mrs Hammersmith's one-time mentor Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum's words were never checked against those of a real and reputable commntator.

Would you believe that nine months later, they invited Mrs Hammersmith back again, to a Church of Christ pulpit, knowing full well she was an unaccredited speaker in the Churches of Christ, who had a Jewish political agenda she promoted as a gospel principle?

You see, they thought they had got rid of the "trouble-maker" who had asked the hard questions they didn't want to answer.

Yes, I have been accused of "making trouble" over unsafe electrical situations in the church, despite explaining to the Administrator why the handman was not allowed under the "Wiring Rules" to do what he was doing. I suspect neither understood the detail in the points attempted to be made.


During the five hour meeting with them, Mrs Wardle had the audacity to ask, in a sneering voice, "How long have you been a Christian, Richard?" The answer would have been twenty-seven years if she had listened years before when she and her husband came to the church with their plans to destroy its foundations. Now we are told they are leaving, going to the Riverland, and one prays that country people will stand up to them. In a sermon (about criticism) some years ago, Mr Wardle said that they had faced angry congregants over in the eastern states at the start of their ministry, and moved on as a result. One has to wonder if trouble accompanies them regularly?


Unlike Mrs Hammersmith, I offer citations for all my points; my maternal grandfather was a high court judge in the UK many years ago, and taught his daughter well, who in turn taught me.

Please take this link to the next page wich concludes the informtion presented here. .



These pages have been produced in an attempt to dissuade the very rude and unchristian views of Christians who believe they have the right to ridicule well researched work done by someone else purely on the basis that the author is persistently faced with the "I have all the answers - and you are ignorant, and your opinion is of little or no value".

Please remember the context with which our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ said "I never knew you" when faced with people at the judgment seat who claimed to have done "this, that and the other" in "His name".

This page and the website are Copyright © 2013.
Designed to be viewed in Mozilla Firefox or Opera web browsers,
although will display in Internet Explorer.

last updated 30th October, 2013 and 22nd Sptember, 2014.