a book about conspiracy theories and the bible
Post on 11-Jan-2016
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTIONJFK, the moon landing hoax, and 9/11. They have all been dogged by conspiracy theories from day one, but they always come out with better and more sophisticated "debunking" of these theories. Why the constant need to cover up things and debunk conspiracy theories, unless there is something true about them?
Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? John 38:37-8
This exchange perfectly demonstrates the conflict between the state and truth that we witness to this very day. Being a monopoly on legitimate violence, which is maintained by violence, the state imposes its version of truth on the people through violent force, thus Christ was crucified. Christ came to bear witness to the truth. When confronted with the Truth Himself, the state had no recourse but to question the very nature of truth. What is truth? This question is almost a clich in the sense that philosophers are always thought of as asking it. The question is key to the way that philosophy undermines truth. The Bible relies on absolute truth, so by questioning absolute truth, they directly oppose the Bible, without necessarily taking an opposing position.Truth is whatever corresponds to reality. There is no other definition of truth that is not self-defeating and absurd. By questioning the very nature of truth, philosophy moves truth from the realm of the absolute to the realm of the relative or subjective. This produces relative or subjective morality, which is really nothing more than nihilism. The Bible relies on absolute truth, so by questioning absolute truth, we remove the credibility of the Bible. Being deceived into a nihilist worldview, we are able to function in this society, even though it has completely gone off the rails in terms of morality and truth. This is the Satanic trap which allows us to be caught in a web of lies and confusion. When we do not know what the truth is, then we cannot distinguish truth from lies, which means we can be manipulated and deceived. We rely on authourities, rather than our own minds and hearts. The key vector for this kind of propaganda is the public education system, which feeds into the academy. The academy then produces the knowledge which our society and nation-states work with. This is what we use to construct our worldviews and make decisions. The occult relies on this notion of subjective truth. This is in direct opposition to the Bibles fundamental premise of absolute truth, founded on God the Father and Jesus Christ. This is why we can entertain the idea of a global, Satanic conspiracy being hidden right under our noses for all these millennia. What they have done is elevated the notion of subjective truth to the norm in society, through philosophy, so that the Bible is just another book, Christianity is just another religion, and we all find our own truth independently using philosophy.The classic example of state reversal of the truth is the modern conspiracy theory. These are historical events and processes which are considered suspect by a large segment of the population, sometimes even by a majority, but which the state, the media, the academy, and their agents, actively seek to cover up. People who question these narratives too ardently are vilified and marginalized. This essay will discuss three of these events: the JFK assassination, the moon landing, and the events of September 11, 2001. By examining a few aspects of these seminal events in detail, this essay will demonstrate that we have been lied to on a scale few people are willing to acknowledge or even grasp, but which the Bible explains perfectly as the age old plan of the devil.
IndoctrinationBefore we look at these conspiracy theories, we need to discuss the nature of state propaganda in our society. In the Oxford Dictionary of World History, we find this definition of propaganda: The attempt to shape or manipulate people's beliefs or actions by means of information (true or false), arguments, or symbols. Propaganda may be printed, broadcast, or visual. The entry goes on to explain that all governments engage in propaganda to some extent, very often with a cynical disregard for the truth (Oxford, 2014). This last part is a statement with which few would disagree or risk appearing hopelessly nave, yet somehow people are not very suspicious of our system of education, which is not only funded and regulated by the government, but which we are mandated to attend from a young age. Kids are made to go to school, obey the teacher, and they are then graded on their efforts like livestock. Would this not be the most effective way of indoctrinating people through propaganda? Public education has become a staple of life in Western liberal democracies, and is usually compulsory. Through public education, the state seeks to shape and manipulate our beliefs through systematic instruction in schools and universities. The manipulation of our beliefs in public education can be seen from early on through such rituals as singing the national anthem, Remembrance Day ceremonies, and the constantly repeated refrain about how lucky we are to live in a country as wealthy and free as Canada. While public education was praised by academics with an almost religious zeal in the era of settlement, it has received increasing criticism over the decades since (Clifford, p. 210). Some of the most persuasive condemnation has come from such economic thinkers as Ludwig von Mises and Murray Rothbard, who argue that central planning reduces economic efficiency (Gaither, 2012). From this perspective on economics, taxation is nothing more than theft, government is a coercive intrusion into the marketplace, and the states violent coercion can never produce any net gain in human flourishing or wealth generation (Kyriazi, 2004). Some have taken this line of thinking to its logical conclusion, but their views have not been well received by the academy (Konkin II, 2005). The state serves our enemy, but it trains us to be its obedient servants from childhood through education.According to this view public education, especially now that it has become compulsory, is simply a system of indoctrination. Public education teaches us all about the benefits of the state, of democracy, and of education itself. We are constantly told in school that we must study hard, get good grades, and hopefully move on to post-secondary education or we will never get a good job and will therefore be relegated to a life of penury. This creates a feeling of dependence in the student, not only on the education system, but on the state and its economic arrangements. This is one of the most subtle forms of propaganda to which we are exposed: learn this or you will be an outcast. It also engenders a sense of inferiority in the student, inferiority in terms of intellect, because if we do not achieve great things in school, we are considered less intelligent than those who do. This makes it very difficult to challenge the official dogma which we receive from the public education system. Without the credentials we earn by obeying the state funded education system, we will not even be qualified to participate in society, let alone criticize the state system of propaganda itself. How do we get the credentials of the education system? By repeating what we learned in that system, and not seriously challenging it.In the typical reductio ad Nazism, the Oxford Dictionary of World History explains that Hitler and Goebbels were highly skilled propagandists who managed to indoctrinate the Germans with scientific racism, expansionist fantasies, and careful censorship of the opinions of foreigners. We are reminded that the success of this kind of propaganda hinged on at least some support for these ideas already lurking in the hearts of the Germans, so that responsibility for the atrocities of World War II cannot be entirely placed with the leaders (Oxford, 2014). Here we see the association of the bad elements of propaganda with Nazism, which tends to place the victors of the war above such criticism. Since America, Canada, Britain and other Western liberal democracies are obviously not grotesquely evil savages like the dreaded Nazis, we can be sure that their propaganda will never be used for such nefarious purposes as promoting war and covering up atrocities. And whenever they are implicated in this kind of activity, as they inevitably are all the time, they can always point to the Nazis as the boogie man to say that at least they are democratic and have never committed crimes of such magnitude as the Holocaust.Of course Weimar Germany was also a democracy, and the idea that the Western liberal democracies do not engage in propaganda to support military aggression is ridiculous. British propaganda during the First World War was so effective that they inspired the propaganda program of the Nazis. They were not concerned with truth but with promoting military engagement in the Great War. On an unprecedented scale the British people were inundated with highly exaggerated images and stories of German atrocities in Belgium against women and children, in order to tug at the heart-strings and support a gendered narrative through accounts of rape, mutilation, and barbarism (Gullace, 1997). The First World War is now widely considered unnecessary, a complete disaster and a waste of human life on a previously unparalleled level, fought for nothing more than the imperial expansion of the various hostile parties. This era of propagandistic hyperbole has been credited with much of the bad reputation that propaganda has in modern times, as it became a bad word after the excesses of Britain during the Great War (Robertson, 2014). In America, after winning a second-term on a he kept us out of the war ticket, Woodrow Wilson immediately launched a massive and extremely aggressive propaganda campaign aimed at getting the American people to support the war, which they were corralled into shortly thereafter, including a draft (Brewer, 2007). So he