Thursday, December 29, 2011

Why National Geographic Shouldn't do Videos About Jesus

The main reason is because much of what they spew IS WRONG! I made the mistake of watching the video Jesus' Arrest on T.V. the other day, and was completely disappointed in what was presented, how it was presented, the lies that were included, and what was purposely left out of the biblical account.

You can go to the link and see for yourself. Compare what is presented in the video against the truth found in the biblical account within the Scriptures, and you will see the clear discrepancies in the video. Oops...sorry. Upon revisiting that link I discovered that there is only a 3 minute excerpt being shown at the site. Perhaps the entire video is available elsewhere on the site.

For the sake of argument, I will point out some of the lies, the incomplete segments, and a few other discrepancies that are evident in the video presentation.


First, when Jesus turned over the tables of the moneychangers, he DID NOT push any of the people involved in the temple corruption. The video incorrectly shows Jesus pushing people and being "violent." Plus, the Nat Geo film neglected to report that Jesus' anger was directed at the moneychangers because "God's House was to be a place of prayer. His anger was justified.

They also got it wrong that Jesus would have objected to the animal sacrifice in the temple. The entire purpose of the Old Testament sacrifices was for the temporary forgiveness of sins given to the person who brought the sacrificial animal as a ransom for the confession of sin. The concept that something unblemished needed to die for the remission of sins was to show how the Messiah, in whom the Jews were looking to appear as promised by God the Father, would be the final perfect (sinless) sacrifice for the sins of the world. Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies that were foretold in the Old Testament (with a few still to be fulfilled at his second coming), and his final sacrifice meant that "it was finished." There was no need for animal sacrifice in the Temple anymore.

Why were there all of these discrepancies? Because they had an agenda, that's why! And it wasn't an agenda that agrees with the true biblical account of the arrest of Jesus.

Another lie is when one man in the video claims that this was Jesus' "first time" at the temple. Recall that Jesus was found by his parents at the temple when he was 12 years old. Plus, Jesus was at the temple numerous times; even if they weren't all recorded in the Scriptures.

Another point, and it's a HUGE ONE, is the fact that Jesus WILLINGLY WENT TO THE CROSS [Jhn 18:11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?] for the sake of mankind so that all who believe in him would not perish but have eternal life! They made the same mistake that most unregenerate people make - blaming Christ's death on the Jews and/or the Roman empire, the soldiers, the people in the crowds etc. The truth is, ALL OF MANKIND was the reason Christ WILLINGLY went to the cross at Calvary! This basic concept of Christianity is, unfortunately, missing from the minds of the video creators.

Such errors often happen when secular entities try to analyze and report on spiritual, biblical matters which they obviously are unable to comprehend.

*******
Update 12/30/11

As I was reading Simon Greenleaf's essay Testimony of the Evangelicals tonight, I was reminded of the fact that the gospel of Luke revealed that Jesus healed the ear of Malchus when the soldiers came to arrest Jesus and Peter used his sword to slash off Malchus' ear:

Luk 22:50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.


Luk 22:51 And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.

This information was omitted from the Nat Geo video.

23 comments:

Pascal Fervor said...

As you may recall, I view all of MSM as the Agency of Lies. Your post documents a specific tactic. If you view it only as a mistake because they are secular, you are falling into the trap they've laid for well-meaning Christians. You'll correct them; and they'll say "ok;" then continue to mislead viewers.

Some of the production team are misled, for sure; but there is an element that wholly knows what it's doing, and I've got evidence for you that their goal is a whole new wave of anti-Christian persecution. And they'll feel good about themselves as they do this.

How can intentional liars feel good about themselves? It's because they believe they are the moral ones and you are the immoral one.

Here's an explanation you may not like, but it is worth your while to comprehend the danger so you may be prepared for knowing that they who view you as the enemy will have no mercy for you.

Understanding the Implacable Enemy Within the West.

It's totally one sided. You do not view them as the enemy, but as souls who might yet be saved.

They, however, view you as the enemy because you would block them from following their most precious principle due to your belief in God. You may understand it as a Satan versus God battle, but they view it as the need to fill a void where there is no God. And you and your beliefs would get in the way of them acting like God. Even though I am not of your faith, I stand with you because they, left to their pessimistic beliefs, have become monstrous.

Christinewjc said...

Hi Pascal Fervor,

I seem to remember your name. Have you posted comments here before?

I read your link and also became quite interested in finding out what makes the person who calls himself "Pascal Fervor" tick. But as I started to read through the comments at the thread entitled "Synopsis of Pascal Fervor" the discussion quickly turned towards insults and argument. Sounds a little bit like my blog - but without the extreme human intellectual banter. Not that such a thing is bad, but we are simple people at my blog. Those who argue against my posts will always do so, and those who support my posts will usually always do so (unless what is shared doesn't agree with Scripture).

No.. I prefer to read God's Written Word, the Bible and follow God's Living Word, Jesus Christ. After all, "the fear (meaning reverence) of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge."

Pro 1:7 The fear of the LORD [is] the beginning of knowledge: [but] fools despise wisdom and instruction.

We are also told that the fool hath said in his heart, "there is no God."

Psa 14:1 ¶ [[To the chief Musician, [A Psalm] of David.]] The fool hath said in his heart, [There is] no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, [there is] none that doeth good.

What's more, Jesus speaking:

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Jesus fulfilled hundreds of prophecies from the Old Testament in his first earthy mission, why would anyone in their right mind not think that he will fulfill all of the prophecies at the end of the age?

Good luck with your site, Pascal Fervor. You have your work cut out for you!

Pascal Fervor said...

It would be foolish to base your opinion on the foolish banter in comments as generated by one troll (RayGun, aka Reaper). He began attacking me on that thread while never addressing a single thing I'd written, and then some friends came by and tried to defend me.

I left his dross there not because I endorse his commentary, but as a warning of how dangerous it is for people to think too highly of themselves. That is precisely the source of mentality that thinks it can challenge God and win.

Pascal Fervor said...

Oh, yes, I have posted here before. My comment contained a similar warning, but that was when the political situation was not so advanced down the drain. Then our adversaries were far less clear about their intentions as they are now.

GMpilot said...

I agree, National Geographic shouldn't do videos about Jesus.

National Geographic's reputation is based on dealing with facts.

Christinewjc said...

Hello again Pascal Fervor,

Please do not misunderstand me. I am not basing my opinion of your blog on the foolish banter in the comment section. Like you said, I often leave the foolish banter of certain individuals up at my blog, too. Many of them have scurried away over the past year - especially when ObaMARXIST turned out to be such a failure.

Previously, you mentioned that you do not adhere to the same faith that I do. What is your religion?

I agree wholehearted with your last statement:


"That is precisely the source of mentality that thinks it can challenge God and win."

I often say that those elitists who think they know better than God (especially the scientists that ignore God) will always be catching up to God in thought, word and deed. They roam around here on earth all puffed up with pride, yet speaking eternally, they are nothing more than an ant in comparison to God's wisdom, knowledge, power, love, and purpose.

Christinewjc said...

Well GM, if you want to label flat out lies as "facts" then that is your choice.

Christinewjc said...

Pascal,

I re-read your first comment and found your last paragraph to be quite enlightening!

"They, however, view you as the enemy because you would block them from following their most precious principle due to your belief in God. You may understand it as a Satan versus God battle, but they view it as the need to fill a void where there is no God. And you and your beliefs would get in the way of them acting like God. Even though I am not of your faith, I stand with you because they, left to their pessimistic beliefs, have become monstrous."

You hit the nail right on the head! The fact that so many of Obama's policies are socialistic/communist in nature (which history has shown DO NOT WORK and lead to much pain, suffering and death) demonstrates why the Occupy Wall Street protests have been so negative, and as you stated, pessimistic.

The TEA Party Patriot movement, in contrast, was highly optimistic even though we were protesting the terrible policies coming out of this gangster government in Washington, D.C. Those demonstrations were peaceful, clean, non-aggressive, hopeful (the genuine kind), and encouraged millions of people to get involved in re-establishing our Constitutional Republic. The mid-term election in 2010 showed the great influence that the TEA Party had in the choice of candidates and the fact that the Republicans took back the House. I truly think that 2012 is going to be an even bigger positive result for Conservative Republicans. We won't weed out all of the RINOS by then, but over the next decade I think that we will be on our way to get more and more Conservatives in office; not only in the federal government, but in state governorships and legislatures, as well as in local governments.

Back to your paragraph.

The same could be said for those who would mock/ridicule/hate Christians and Orthodox Zionist Jews. What causes them to act that way? Why can't they leave those who practice such faiths alone? I think that your paragraph above explains it.

GMpilot said...

Oh, you finally got around to publishing my reply. You can ignore the repost, then.

All I have to go by is what you describe, since I did not see the program myself.

You wrote, ”...the Messiah, in whom the Jews were looking to appear as promised by God the Father, would be the final perfect (sinless) sacrifice for the sins of the world. Jesus fulfilled all the prophecies that were foretold in the Old Testament and his final sacrifice meant that "it was finished." There was no need for animal sacrifice in the Temple anymore.”

Since Jesus had not yet died, the temple-goers continued to sacrifice. He certainly didn't tell them he had come to die on their behalf. Now, he might have objected to further animal sacrifice because of what he was going to do; but he was raised as a Jew, and no doubt observed all the customs and rituals of his people at that time. On those grounds, I do not believe he would have objected to the holy slaughter of animals.

As to the facts: about the only thing we know about Jesus is that he lived, and died.
When was he born? Even biblical scholars say it wasn't the 25th of December. We don't know.

Was he “wholly god and wholly man”? No one belongs to two species at once (and what differentiates them, anyway?). We don't know.

Did he rise from the dead? According to biblical accounts, no one actually saw it happen. Some came to the tomb and found it empty, some others ate and spoke with him without realizing who he was, and contrary to his own prophecy, he spent at most a day and a half 'in the earth', not three days. We don't know.

Did he fulfill the qualifications as the Jewish Messiah? Not according to them, and they should know. To this day, they believe their promised Messiah has not yet come. They've already waited 2500 years to have land of their own again; they may have to wait even longer for the warrior-prince their legends foretell. We don't know.

National Geographic's reputation is based on dealing with facts. From what you say, they produced this program without having enough of them.

Pascal said...

I have sustained a root virus attack on my home computer today. I must keep this short.

I am relieved that you reread my comments. I'm not sure the point at my link has hit you yet. Please reread it too. The elitists' new moral code is based upon the Precautionary Principle. Their view is something like "There being no solid proof of God, and the burden of proof is upon you who have have faith, shut up and get out of our way until you can provide solid proof. We know you will insist, so we will shut you up anyway we deem necessary."

As I said, they have no mercy even though you intend them no harm. Their view is entirely Utilitarian. Anyone who gets in their way is by definition NOT INNOCENT. Thus, their new moral code leaves them feeling quite good about themselves even as they arrange the world so that billions will die. "In a world without God, someone needs to take His place, and it ought to be the best and brightest amongst us."

John Schwoebel said...

Like all religions GMpilot Christianity is based on mythology. Nothing more, nothing less>

Christinewjc said...

GM,

Jesus certainly did tell his disciples that he was going to die and rise again. Many of them did not understand or comprehend it until that Easter morning when he did rise from the dead.

Jesus was seen by over 500 people, as is recorded in the Bible, after he rose from the dead. It is a proven fact of history. Those (like your new friend John Schwoebel here) who disbelieve do so out of ignorance, arrogance, a reprobate mind, hatred against the God of the Bible and/or a non-recognition of their own sinful nature.

John, I suggest that you read Testimony of the Evangelists by Simon Greenleaf (1783-1853).

Christinewjc said...

Update 12/30/11

As I was reading Simon Greenleaf's essay Testimony of the Evangelicals tonight, I was reminded of the fact that the gospel of Luke revealed that Jesus healed the ear of Malchus when the soldiers came to arrest Jesus and Peter used his sword to slash off Malchus' ear:

Luk 22:50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.


Luk 22:51 And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.


This information was omitted from the Nat Geo video.

GMpilot said...

CJW: ”Jesus was seen by over 500 people, as is recorded in the Bible, after he rose from the dead. It is a proven fact of history.”
Then you should easily be able to tell me:

Where this event took place;
Who wrote an account of it;
What was said, or seen, or took place;
When the sighting occurred; and
Why no record of this exists outside of the writings of Paul...who didn't see it himself.
Jesus wasn't even seen by Paul's companions on the road to Damascus!

Your move.

Christinewjc said...

Pascal,

I'm so sorry to hear that your site was attacked. Hope you get it cleared up ASAP. Norton Anti-virus has protected my computer for years. I think it is the best. However, there have been attacks on this blog in the past (malware being deposited via a link causing Google to put my blog on the "could harm your computer" list). I was able to get that resolved by inquiring what links in my sidebar were causing the problem. I removed them, my site was reviewed again, and that warning was lifted by Google.

I apologize if I am not "getting" your point regarding the "precautionary principle." I read your recent blog post about it and have concluded that perhaps I need an example?

Would the following scenario qualify as an example:

A while back, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was asked in an interview about the Obama birth certificate issue. He stated that the justices 'don't want to touch that issue' - or something similar. Would sidestepping a controversial issue like that qualify as an example of a person (or persons) utilizing the precautionary principle?

If I've got it wrong again, please excuse my failure to comprehend what you are trying to convey to me.

Christinewjc said...

GM,

You wrote:

"Since Jesus had not yet died, the temple-goers continued to sacrifice. He certainly didn't tell them he had come to die on their behalf. Now, he might have objected to further animal sacrifice because of what he was going to do; but he was raised as a Jew, and no doubt observed all the customs and rituals of his people at that time. On those grounds, I do not believe he would have objected to the holy slaughter of animals."

In that case, then you would agree with me and disagree with the Nat Geo presumption stated on the video.

You wrote:

"As to the facts: about the only thing we know about Jesus is that he lived, and died.
When was he born? Even biblical scholars say it wasn't the 25th of December. We don't know."


At least we know the year because our calendars changed from BC to AD - meaning - "in the year of our Lord."

It is correct that December 25th probably wasn't the exact date. In fact, some scholars believe that it was more likely that Christ was born months before. Choosing a date to celebrate Christ's birth doesn't mean that it didn't actually happen.

You wrote:

"Was he “wholly god and wholly man”? No one belongs to two species at once (and what differentiates them, anyway?). We don't know"

The Bible tells us that Jesus Christ was both God and man at the Incarnation. There are several Bible verses that attest to His Deity status.

Jhn 5:36 But I have greater witness than [that] of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me.

It helps to read the the entire chapter.

Again, Jesus identifies with the Father:

Jhn 14:7 ¶ If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.


Jhn 14:8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.


Jhn 14:9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou [then], Shew us the Father?


Jhn 14:10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.


Jhn 14:11 Believe me that I [am] in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works' sake.

You wrote:

"Did he rise from the dead? According to biblical accounts, no one actually saw it happen. Some came to the tomb and found it empty, some others ate and spoke with him without realizing who he was, and contrary to his own prophecy, he spent at most a day and a half 'in the earth', not three days. We don't know."

Once again, it appears that you did not bother to read Simon Greenleaf's Testimony of the Evangelists.

Christ rose on the third day. Friday to Sunday is three days. And over 500 people saw Jesus as he appeared to many over several days before His Ascension into heaven.

Christinewjc said...

GM wrote:

"Did he fulfill the qualifications as the Jewish Messiah? Not according to them, and they should know. To this day, they believe their promised Messiah has not yet come. They've already waited 2500 years to have land of their own again; they may have to wait even longer for the warrior-prince their legends foretell. We don't know."

The Jews who believed in Christ became members of The Way. The title of Christianity was not yet given for those who believed in Christ back then. Today, the Jews who believe that Christ IS the long-awaited Messiah who was prophesied in the Old Testament are called Messianic Jews.

I am preparing to write a new blog post about the book of Revelation. I will be utilizing Edward Hindson's book
The Book of Revelation: Unlocking The Future. I still think that it is one of the best books on the subject.

In the introduction, Hindson provides ten points regarding the big picture of Revelation. Point # 8 informs us:

Quote:

"Millennial Kingdom. Jesus Christ will reign upon the earth for one thousand years (a millennium) while Satan is bound in the "abyss." During this time, God's promises to Israel will be fulfilled. The Messiah shall reign from Jerusalem over all the earth in peace, blessing, and prosperity (Rev. 20:1-6; Is. 2:2-4; 9:6-7)".

It has been pointed out by several Christian apologists that the Jews in Jesus' time were expecting more of a conquering Messiah, rather than a suffering Messiah who would come, die on a cross for mankind and through his death "take away the sins of the world," even though much detail about him (and what would happen) was written in the book of Isaiah.

That is just one reason why Jesus wasn't recognized as the Messiah by some Jews at His first coming. But He WILL be recognized as such at His second coming!

Pascal Fervor said...

My site is ok Christine. It's my computer. Something got past my Avast Internet Security and now that program is blocked. Acts like a root virus.

An example of the Precautionary Principle would be: Someone charging that your ideas are a threat to humanity. Your normal defense is that they must prove it. They counter that the danger is so bad IF they are right, that the burden of proof shifts to you. You would be forced to prove that your efforts are not a danger. Both "freedom of speech and assembly and of religion" and "innocent until proven guilty" would be thrown out the window wherever the Precautionary Principle has been recognized.

GMpilot said...

Sorry I didn't get this in before the calendar turned over, but...

”In that case, then you would agree with me and disagree with the Nat Geo presumption stated on the video.” Yes.

”At least we know the year because our calendars changed from BC to AD - meaning - "in the year of our Lord."
If you say that, then you've never studied the history of the calendar. We don't even know the year, because the facts we know (the reign of Herod, for example) conflict with the times the bible tells us. Even the Anno Domini dating didn't become 'official' until five hundred years later.

”Christ rose on the third day. Friday to Sunday is three days.”
According to Mark (15:25, 33), Jesus' crucifixion lasted six hours from 'the third hour', at approximately 9 am, until his death at the ninth hour, corresponding to about 3 pm, on the sabbath (Friday). He was buried by sundown, as per Jewish custom, probably 3~4 hours after his death. By sunrise on Sunday he was already reported to be up and about. Sundown on Friday to sunrise on Sunday is at best 36 hours, or a day and a half.
Jesus did not fulfill his own prophecy.

Hau’oli Makahiki Hou

GMpilot said...

CJW: ”... And over 500 people saw Jesus as he appeared to many over several days before His Ascension into heaven.”

Paul said that Jesus was seen by five hundred people. 1 Corinthians 15:6 says he appeared on a mountain in Galilee. Really? And none of them who were there claimed to have seen him? None of them ever wrote about it, or spoke to someone who could write so that they could write about it? Paul didn't see it himself; if he had, he would have said so. In fact, he never even actually met Jesus 'in the flesh', as it were.
There are no eyewitness reports of Jesus Unplanked, anywhere. Jesus appeared to his disciples repeatedly, but never to people who might have doubted him (i.e. the temple priests).
In a court of law, hostess, Paul's claim would be called 'hearsay' and even the renowned Mr. Greenleaf could not consider this to be evidence. Sightings of Elvis (and there have been many) have exactly the same credulity, and you don't believe them, do you? Or Joseph Smith's revelation from Moroni?

Oh, yeah: Mark simply says the ascension occurred, but doesn't describe it. Luke doesn't say just when the ascension took place; John doesn't mention it happening at all. For all anyone knows, Jesus and his disciples are still there on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, having a fish fry.

Christinewjc said...

Your attempt at mockery is foolish and tiresome. Besides, your drivel doesn't change the truth.

There were more than 500 believers before the ascension.

1 Corinthians 15:6
He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.


The writers of the Bible were led along by the power of the Holy Spirit. If 500 people wrote individual accounts but were not led by the Holy Spirit to do so then their accounts would not have been God inspired.

God is the Author of His Word, the Bible.


To whom did Jesus make his first post-resurrection appearance?

The two Marys
Matthew 28:1, 9
In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre.... And as they went to tell his disciples, behold, Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came and held him by the feet, and worshipped him.

Mary Magdalene
Mark 16:9
Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

John 20:11-14
But Mary stood without at the sepulchre weeping ... and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

Cleopas and another
Luke 24:13-31
And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus.... And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days? ... And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, he took bread, and blessed it, and brake, and gave to them. And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight.

Cephas
1 Corinthians 15:4-5

And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve.


On the road to Damascus, Paul was blinded by the glory of Christ but he did hear the words spoken to him by Christ.

In
Acts, Matthew records that Paul had seen the light of Christ before he was blinded:

Act 9:3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:


Act 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?


Act 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks.


Jesus also spoke to Paul in night time visions:

Act 18:9 Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace:

Act 22:14 And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.


Act 22:18 And saw him saying unto me, Make haste, and get thee quickly out of Jerusalem: for they will not receive thy testimony concerning me.


Act 26:16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;


2Cr 12:1 It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord.

Christinewjc said...

Thanks for that explanation, Pascal.

I must say that it is kind of ironic that some leftist secular progressives (especially the celebrity types) might use such an idea against Christian Conservative viewpoints, but ignore the dangers of Islam and label it "the religion of peace" when, for the most part, it has been quite the opposite for centuries.


I hope that your computer problem will be solved quickly.

GMpilot said...

I knew you wouldn't be able to leave it alone. All right, let's go.

”If 500 people wrote individual accounts but were not led by the Holy Spirit to do so then their accounts would not have been God inspired.”
I'm not asking for individual accounts, I'm asking for just one. Of the 500 witnesses, not even one had anything to say about it; not what Jesus did, not what he said, not even a simple “...and I was there”. One does not need to have some holy spirit within to describe events happening before one's own eyes.
As an ex-Catholic, you probably have some experience with written accounts that you no longer feel are 'God-inspired'. But in a time and place where there were hundreds of gods and their messengers about, perhaps Jesus' post-resurrection appearance was only one of many.

What 'mockery'? John 21 describes Jesus waiting for his disciples after a fruitless day of fishing. He told them where to cast their net and where they caught 153 fish; he already had a fire going, and bread; and verses 22~23 are famous for implying that Jesus would return in John's lifetime...but the book ends with them all there at the seaside, and Jesus does not ascend.
Are you saying I described something that didn't happen in the story? Your screeching doesn't change the truth either. Only Paul describes the assembly of 500. He doesn't say how he knew that, and he wasn't there himself to see them. That makes it hearsay, not fact.