“Fake news” and the strong delusion: who’s deluded?

In my first and second posts, I drew your attention to the subject of international pedophilia rings and their connection with satanic ritual abuse. I did so in the context of the then looming presidential election.

The first post concerning Clinton’s satanic connections appeared before the “spirit cooking” and “Pizzagate” stories had broken in either the corporate or alternative media. How then did I know there was fire? Because the Bible tells me there must be, owing strictly to the nature of the powerful people who run this world (Ephesians 6:12). That, with a little bit of spiritual discernment (1 Corinthians 2:14-15) and a memory of recent history (who could forget the misdeeds of the Clintons done in the 90s?), pointed strongly in the direction that Hillary Clinton is in fact the deeply evil, dark person she has proved to be.

This issue of satanism and high-powered pedophile rings is a subject that has been documented. Only now, however, is it breaking into the mainstream. Just a few days after my first post, the spirit-cooking story emerged, confirming my initial take on Clinton. In the second post, a direct follow-on to the first, I also predicted that the mainstream media would eventually spin the story without addressing any of the evidence. That’s exactly what’s happened now that “Pizzagate” is here.

We read articles whose titles declare the story “fake.” In one such recent article from The New York Times by Cecilia Kang, the word “fake” appears nineteen times on a single page! We read quotes from the persons involved denying any wrongdoing (here’s a representative NPR interview). But the damning evidence is passed over in complete silence. Let’s be sensible: does printing the denials of those accused take the place of a journalistic investigation? Let’s be rational: would someone guilty of these things freely admit to it? What’s the twisted logic in taking these interviews and articles seriously then? Apparently something as ridiculous as this: James Alefantis has told NPR in an interview that he’s not involved in sex-trafficking, so he must not be, because if he were, he’d say that he was. I’m sure every suspected criminal wishes he were so lucky! Just deny the charges, and that ends the matter! As for the Kang NYT piece mentioned above, why have a tech reporter assigned a story of this complexity and magnitude? Does any of this pass the smell test? Surely not, but the propaganda giants hope you don’t notice.

Just because these articles and interviews declare that something’s isn’t the case doesn’t make it false. Government media cannot birth reality by ink fiat, unless its readers allow themselves to believe the lie.

Shifting gears to return to the central point: who would have thought that simply reading the Bible would make one a more savvy political prognosticator than those who watch hours on hours of manufactured corporate propaganda media? Start reading the Bible and get into the Spirit and then you’ll find exactly what everyone who does so discovers: observing mass-culture becomes like watching a movie that you’ve already seen. But instead of film characters you see real, living mesmerized masses all around you in the streets and on the highways and in the offices and in your philosophy seminars. And just as you feel sorry for the unsuspecting characters in a film who know nothing of what awaits them in the final scene, so too in this little movie that just happens to be reality. In every case, and this Pizzagate story is no exception, the final shot is predictably the same: we see people who are unwilling to process what they’ve just experienced. Left in a state of willful denial that appears sure to long persist, the credits roll, and it’s over as if nothing ever happened. Drowned out by something else, attention shifts and wanes. It’ll be the same thing the next time around, too.

And yet these same souls addicted to mass-media are often the same ones quick to dismiss the Bible, when, of course, the difference in the respective prophetic track-records between a mainstream government rag like The New York Times and the word of God couldn’t be more startling. Whereas the Bible assures us that there are people doing the kinds of unspeakably depraved and evil things that have just been exposed; the latter tries to tell us that there’s nothing to the idea, even when it’s already been exposed. One predicts reality before it arrives; the other denies it after it is already upon us.

Many people (not only Christians) have already known about this issue for decades, which is why I was discussing it on this site before anyone started claiming that the entire thing was hatched by Trump supporters. The people now saying so are the very same people I was hoping to alert in my original two posts, by bringing this issue up before it would be scrubbed, as it subsequently has. As I mentioned then, similar things like this have happened before, going all the way back to the 80s and 90s with the Bush and Reagan administrations. The predictable dodge that this was invented by Trump supporters is an insult to anyone with a thinking mind; many of the people covering this story are strictly apolitical, because they know that our current system is so corrupt it isn’t worth participating in. They’re hardly Trump supporters, and neither am I. I was against Trump no less than I was Clinton, and in fact I wrote to say one reason I was not voting for either of them is their shared ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

It’s a big sick satanic club, and God is exposing it (Luke 8:17), which is why this notion of “fake news” has been introduced into the public consciousness to steer people who aren’t yet walking in the Holy Spirit away from having to confront the organized, systematic wickedness of this world. It’s all right there before us; see it for yourself.

Don’t believe anything you read that doesn’t pass a sound discernment test. The spirit of untruth is working hard in our world.

Be wise, and test all things.

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12.

That Single Individual

Striving to be set apart from the shrewdness of today's world of academic philosophy, That Single Individual does philosophy in the hope that his work might stir others to faith in Jesus. This flippant disregard for career idolatry has made him unpopular in certain circles, a fact he only considers cause for thanksgiving, since it means he knows something the placement directors and esteemed chairs won't admit to anyone, especially themselves: there are in fact fates worse than never becoming an assistant professor!

View All Posts

10 Comments

  1. Hi That Single Individual,
    I’m trying to decide what the takeaway from this post is supposed to be. Is it that you were right? Is it that calling news “fake” does not make it so?
    Do you see these posts as contributing to the philosophical underpinnings of conservativism in some way?

  2. “Don’t believe anything you read that doesn’t pass a sound discernment test. The spirit of untruth is working hard in our world.

    Be wise, and test all things.

    2 Thessalonians 2:9-12.”

    Is this sort of life-wisdom specific only to biblical scripture? (How did this wisdom not make it into Proverbs? A lot of stuff in there about not running with the wrong crowd, but this seems to concern running with the wrong epistemic crowd….)

    More generally (in reference to this: “That Single Individual does philosophy in the hope that his work might stir others to faith in Jesus”), what life-wisdom will we find in scripture that we won’t find anywhere else, including the writings of Plato and Aristotle? Maybe I’ll re-read the Sermon on the Mount for edification here shortly….

    • Hi Ultimate Philosopher,

      There is a great deal I could say in response, but I’ll keep my answers brief.

      It depends what one means by “specific.” Man is made in the image of God, and thus our powers of reason and conscience allow us to know much about divine matters without the written revelation of the Scriptures and the Incarnation of the Word or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in us. That is why, for instance, one can find a great deal of wisdom in someone like Seneca. But, yes, in my opinion, the truth is uniquely revealed in the person of Jesus Christ, and the Scriptures will reveal things to the heart that no other text will. I am sorry if I suggested that such truth doesn’t also reside in Old Testament texts such as the Proverbs; I do believe it’s certainly there as well. As Christ himself says in Luke 24:27, the scriptures of old speak of Him…

      The Apostle Paul in the Epistle to the Colossians observes that the Mosaic Law was simply a shadow of the full truth to come, the truth that revealed in the man Christ Jesus. I believe the same is in many respects true of what the pagan sages knew; notice that when Paul in Acts 17 come to Athens, some of the philosophers recognized the truth and became Christians. They didn’t see Revelation as an annulment of reason; they recognized the Gospel to be its full realization and final culmination!

      The point is that when one repents of one’s sins and gets washed in the blood of Christ, the truth itself will come to dwell in one’s heart and guide one. One of the classic problems for most moral theories is that moral principles are supposedly too generalized to be of any real handy use in a real-life situation. But when you have the Holy Spirit shed in your heart, that is not a problem! He will order and guide your steps so that you can walk upright and blameless in the light. That kind of moral know-how and wherewithal simply wasn’t available prior to the arrival of the man Christ Jesus. But it is now freely available to those who decide to love the truth. As the Scriptures say, the Holy Ghost will bring all truth to your remembrance and furnish you equipped for all good things.

      So to summarize, we are talking about a shift here: from mere propositional knowledge of the truth, to the ability to experientially exercise and abide in the truth.

      I do hope you re-read the Sermon on the Mount! That would be a great place to start…

      • Single, in the OP you wrote: ““Don’t believe anything you read that doesn’t pass a sound discernment test. The spirit of untruth is working hard in our world.

        Be wise, and test all things.”

        In what way are non-scriptural writings (take your strongest cases, e.g., Plato and Aristotle, perhaps Kant and a few others) lacking in terms of advice about sound discernment, which can only be had through living the life of the Word? What sorts of differences in actions, habits, lifestyle, etc. can we point to between a Christian and an (non-Christian) Aristotelian when it comes to soundness of discernment? Is it being suggested or implied here that living the life of God will bring greater truth-discernment skill than otherwise? A deistic moral-teachings-of-Jesus follower such as Jefferson appears to be most capable in the truth-discernment dept., after all.

      • Hi Ultimate,

        Thanks for these questions. I’ll do my best to answer.

        There is, I would argue, a lack in non-scriptural texts to advise us in the life of truth. But the deficit does not simply (or necessarily primarily) consist in the set of propositions it does or does not recommend, or the reasoning it does or does not supply in support of that advice. It consists, instead, in the fact that the texts themselves are not alive. When one reads the word of God as it intended to be read, the words will come alive and work in and through you. That isn’t the case with an uninspired text. Kant or Aristotle might enlighten me in some respect, but their words will not take up residence within my heart and swell up within me. They do not have that power; but the words of Christ do.

        I would hasten to add that much of what Christ and the Apostles say regarding a life of virtue is recognizable to pagan wisdom. And again, as I said before, part of that is because Christ is the realization of the moral law in us. Take for instance 2 Peter 5-7. Peter discusses many virtues known to non-Christians: temperance, patience, brotherly kindness, etc. But the point is that Peter says add these to your “faith.” Faith is the basic presupposition of the virtuous life, because the virtuous life must necessarily be one of truth. But if Jesus Christ is the Truth, then how can one hope to ever live a truly virtuous life apart from Him? So the point is that in the wake of the life of Jesus Christ, rejecting Him is to in effect choose falsehood and hence a life of virtue, however else it might be admirable, will not be attainable.

        This is why Paul talks about loving the truth. If you love the truth, you will love Jesus Christ, who will then in turn lead you into all virtue. But to deny Christ and then strive for virtue is, from the perspective of the Apostles, a contradiction in terms.

        This is why Paul writes that those who reject the love of the truth are subject to the strong delusion. To deny Christ is to already choose falsehood, which means that one is already in effect living a life of error.

        There is also of course the issue of sin and conscience. In Romans chapter 2, Paul appeals to his audience’s moral conscience as proof that they know there is a God who has made them in His image. He also observes that these same people praise and blame each other based on the moral law revealed in them (Romans 2: 13-15). But Paul’s point is that the moral law that is written in their conscience “by nature” means that they have no excuse for rejecting Christ, because Christ is the fulfillment, the living truth, of that law.

        So, yes, in my opinion, living a life of God will bring greater discernment in a few key respects. First, to come to Christ requires that one humbles oneself and admits that one has gone astray. Humility, aside from being a moral virtue, is also a great intellectual virtue. If one doesn’t have the humility to admit he needs a Savior, what hope does that man have to really live a life of moral and intellectual integrity? None at all, I would say. Second, coming to Christ will purge you of your sins and give you a pure conscience (Hebrews 9:14). Sin is deceiving, so in being purged of one’s sins, one can perceive and think more clearly. Sin blinds us. Jesus gives us back our eyes to see. Third, in being washed clean through the blood of Christ, one is set free (John 8:32). In being set free from sin and the power of death, one is also set free from hypocrisy. In John 7:24 Christ commands us to judge righteously. But it is impossible to judge righteously (especially concerning moral matters) when one is still in one’s sins. This is precisely Paul’s point in Romans 2:1. Those who have not yet come to Christ for the forgivenness of sins yet judge others are hypocrites. So, in living a life of God, we are free to exercise sound and non-hypocritical judgment. We are, as the Bible says, expected to openly rebuke evil. But we have no right to do that when we ourselves are living in a state of moral darkness, because we are rejecting Christ.

        This was all rather off the cuff, but I hope some of it helps!

  3. Hi Walter,

    Good questions.

    I only wished to say “I was right” so as to establish the relevant timeline of events. In doing so, my hope is that people who have been following these posts might be more inclined to look into these matters for themselves now that they’ve seen some of this stuff come to fruition. To many, I know, these claims will sound very outlandish, so much so, in fact, that they might refuse to even look into them at all. But if I can show that there were many who saw this coming, and knew about these issues brewing, then perhaps that will give naysayers pause, and ultimately motivate them to look into the matter. That was my intent anyway.

    I do see my posts as contributing to philosophical conservatism, and in a basic way in fact. Nearly every big ticket leftist social item is, when examined, a direct inversion of nature and the human good according to the word of God. But most people will not countenance that possibility unless they are given strong evidence for considering it, which means that they have to first at least accept that there is a God. What better way to soften up someone to that idea than by showing them the face of pure evil? Once you’ve established the existence of systematic evil, you can then identify the true source and nature of the leftist agenda. It is the spirit of antichrist, but most secular people (including conservatives) won’t believe that unless they are shown compelling evidence that there is a spiritual agenda at work behind this. The point of drawing attention to this issue about child-trafficking and satanic ritual abuse is to alert people to the reality that the origin of political ideologies goes far deeper than any secular political debate would suggest. The battle line is drawn well-before, and it only strengthens the position of political conservatism to show that it formulates the truths of God and the Good rather than the lies of Satan and falsehood.

    Let me give you some examples. Gay marriage and transgenderism did not just come from nowhere. The are direct inversions of Christ’s own words in Mark 10. The same could just as easily be said about abortion, which essentially legalizes mass child sacrifice as described in the Old Testament. Leftism is an ideology that destroys life and renders people helpless. It is not ennobling or loving; it is a perversion of creation. This shouldn’t come as a surprise. Look into the historical roots of modern so-called progressivism like Marx, and you’ll see that there’s more at work than mere politics. Once again, the Satanic connections are there. Check out Richard Wurmbrand’s book “Marx and Satan” about it.

    My point, then, is that collectivism, statism, etc. are not simply political agendas; they are rooted in a spiritual force that is trying to invert and destroy the reality. So in short, I want to get to first principles before I have what most people would otherwise be inclined to treat as a merely political debate. To me, things go much deeper than that. Before I try to persuade someone that, for example, that abortion should be outlawed, I want people to know the spiritual origin of the abortionist agenda in the first place. Likewise with gay marriage or transgenderism or racist identity politics, or anything else like that. When one does so, there’s a higher likelihood others will come to agree, because they’ll finally see the deeper evil at work behind the agenda of political leftism.

    • Sadly from a Biblical Christian perspective the basic fact is many (probably most) political conservatives are just as evil as the much-vilified liberals.

      Of course people generally don’t like to hear this, they want to believe they’re basically good and it’s the “other guys over there” who are bad. It’s a very old game.

      Don’t get me wrong, I much prefer conservative policies and conservative people over liberal(s) because the former don’t pose the same types of immanent threats to Christ’s people as the latter.

      Just as I prefer inconsistent atheists (garden variety anti-theists) over the consistent type (nihilists and sociopaths).

      But at the end of the day the godless political conservatives bow down at the altar of the anti-christ system of human government, suckling at the teat of the beast just like the liberals.

      There are really only two possible sides in this world, and it isn’t “conservative/right” or “liberal/left” – it’s Christ’s or Satan’s. There’s no middle ground. All people in all places are serving one of two possible masters, period. It’s just that black and white. But don’t take my word for it, just read John 3:18 or John 3:36. Many other Scriptures could be cited, but these two should suffice.

      Political conservatism is a false religion no less than political liberalism replete with its own liturgy, creeds, doctrines, preachers, apologists and denominations.

      But this is no surprise to the Bible Christian because the God of the Bible created human beings to be worshippers, and of course He did a very good job. People are really fantastic worshippers. The problem ever since The Fall is unredeemed humans pick very bad gods to worship, and instead of worshipping the blessed Triune One true and living Creator Who is alone worthy of all praise and glory, men and women worship the creation instead, making gods of that which is false and unworthy.

      I’m glad to see “That Single Individual” telling the truth. The God of the Bible is a God of truth, and His people are to be a people of the truth, who walk in the truth, and follow The Way, The Truth, and The Life – Jesus Christ.

      In reality people have exactly one reason for even existing in the first place, to glorify God in all things (1 Cor. 10:31). Period. Failure to do so is an eternally damnable offense. And it’s impossible for anyone on earth to do this apart from being in Christ. This may sound very narrow and exclusive, but it’s just the witness of Scripture, which is but another way of saying it’s the witness of God.

      If you think about it there are only two classes of creatures in existence that fail to glorify God as they should and as He deserves – human beings and fallen angels (a.k.a. “demons”). Nice company, eh?

      This is why my opening observation is manifestly true. Think about it. On which side of the great divide do you stand, reader? Unlike the demons, God has made a way for fallen, corrupted, wicked rebel humans to be reconciled unto Him through His Son Jesus Christ by becoming Christ-followers (a.k.a. “Christians”).

      Here’s a link to a great resource to help those interested to answer a very weighty and significant question: “What is a Christian?”

      Soli Deo Gloria!

  4. Single, up-thread you write:
    “[Without Christ] a life of virtue, however else it might be admirable, will not be attainable.”
    Would an Aristotelian-Thomist say something more like: There is virtue, happiness, and so on, and then there’s complete or perfect virtue, happiness, etc. Wouldn’t an Aquinas say something to the effect that there can be virtue in a secularist’s habits, but that this is imperfect virtue, not yet complete?
    I’m trying also to imagine a way someone like Jefferson might reply here. He accepts Jesus’s main commandment to love one’s neighbor, to express love in one’s life, love, loving, lovingness, that good stuff. But what you’re saying in effect (?) is that a Christian will love in a different way, through both thought and action, than a non-Christian would (and I’m assuming that we aren’t talking here merely about having the Holy Spirit working in someone without their realizing it, as with conscience perhaps, but having a full conscious embrace of Christ as savior/redeemer), and we might be able to clearly identify such differences in behavior. So if Jefferson were to convert to all the Christian doctrine, how might his behaviors, habits, etc. been identifiably different as far as loving his neighbors goes?

    • Hi Ultimate,

      Let me take your comments and questions in turn.

      I’m not entirely confident about what an Aristotelian-Thomist might say, because I only know the basics of that view, but what you say on that view’s behalf sounds right to me.

      I want to address your comment on virtue, but let me address the Jefferson bit first, and then circle back to the virtue issue. The two are in fact related.

      I don’t want to get bogged down in the details of Jefferson’s philosophy, personality, or biography, because the only relevant thing I think for us in this context is that Jefferson in many typifies the enlightened man, someone who says that he wants to live virtuously, but someone who thinks it’s possible to do so apart from entering into faith. In a word, Jefferson treats the teachings of Christ as abstract principles, but he does not evaluate himself personally in light of them. What do I mean? Notice that Jefferson might claim that he lives by Christ’s precept to love others as he loves his own self, but he forgets the first commandment: love thy God with all they mind, soul, heart, and strength. And that’s the key issue.

      To obey the first commandment to love God is to deny one’s own self. That’s why Jesus repeatedly tells the crowds to “deny yourself and follow me.” Until one fundamentally surrenders one’s entire will and life to God, then one is still living a life that’s fundamentally selfish, even if one does all sorts of admirable and kind things to and for others.

      The “first works” of virtue is faith, which itself requires repentance. One has to surrender one’s own will, so that one can be a “vessel fit for the master’s use.” Those who never do so are capable of nobles emotions, thoughts, and intentions, but they have not truly gotten to a place where, by loving God, they are capable of loving others. There is still the root of self-love.

      Another way to put this is the way that someone like Charles Finney did (that’s not to say I agree with everything Finney says). But Finney notes that at the heart of all sin is selfishness. He says that unbelievers are capable of the same emotions and thoughts as the believer, so emotion is not in itself what distinguishes the righteous from the wicked. The difference, he contends, is that the believer acts out of a sense of duty; he no longer obeys his desires. Instead, he obeys God. Jefferson (and others like him) might have done many outwardly great things, and they might have been capable of fine feelings and emotions, but he never crucified his ego so that all that remained was the will to do with his life whatever Christ saw fit to do.

      That, to me, is the key difference.

      So, to return to the issue of virtue. Genuine virtue is impossible apart from the life of faith, because only in faith can one be acting from a true sense of duty to God and one’s neighbor.

Leave a Reply (Be sure to read our comment disclaimer)