THE ULTIMATE CONSPIRACY THEORY
By
Lonnie C Hendrix aka Miller Jones
A friend (who is also part of the Armstrong Church of God culture) recently forwarded me a couple of articles on the mechanics of conspiracy theories. Although his email did not contain any commentary, it was obvious that he felt these articles had a high degree of relevance to our shared experience in Armstrongism.
The first article appeared in the BBC’s Focus Magazine (online edition) and was titled, “What makes a conspiracy theory?” The article was posted 5 September 2018 by Moya Sarner and makes some very interesting points that I think most ACOG folks would find interesting.
Sarner states: “Conspiracy theorists tend to believe that everyone else is being deceived, apart from themselves. The methods of deception, they believe, are elaborate, complex, ongoing and executed almost perfectly – pulling the wool over the eyes of those who haven’t yet ‘seen the light’.” Armstrong taught his followers that they alone had the TRUTH, and that the rest of the world (including Christianity at large) were deceived. He taught that Satan and the Roman Catholic Church had plotted and executed an elaborate, complex and ongoing scheme to change God’s laws and pervert/distort doctrinal truth.
Sarner goes on to say that conspiracy theorists employ selective proofs and reject or ignore any evidence which contradicts their thesis. Continuing, we read: “Conspiracy theories are often based not on hard evidence, but on picking holes in the mainstream narrative, pointing out what does not fit or does not seem to have an explanation, and using this as evidence that the conspiracy theory must be true.” Armstrong loved to point out inconsistencies in the narrative of Traditional Christianity (e.g. the notion of playing a harp all day while lounging on a cloud, being tormented in the flames of hell, three days and three nights, the pagan origins of Christian holidays, etc.) In short, he described these things in such terms to his readers that their absurdity made his teachings seem like the epitome of reason and common sense.
In “The rise of the Flat Earthers” (same magazine and author), Sarner points out that these theories are often completely unsupported by scientific evidence; “But conspiracy theorists question the institutions that provide this evidence, and countering their beliefs with logical reasoning doesn’t seem to work.” That should also sound familiar to anyone who has read or heard Armstrong’s teachings. Herbie often ridiculed theologians, scientists and intellectuals.
Why are we susceptible to these theories? Referring to an expert in the field, Sarner writes: “‘Our brain has a bias towards seeing meaning rather than just chaos, so sometimes we may think we see a pattern when it doesn’t really exist.’ He explains that this has evolutionary benefits: if a noise in the bushes is believed to be caused by a tiger rather than the wind, the listener will take evasive action which could save his life. ‘So when it comes to conspiracy theories, it’s all about taking ambiguous information and weaving it all together, spotting the patterns and connecting the dots.’” In other words, there has to be an explanation for what’s going on in the world, AND THIS MAKES SENSE TO ME!
Likewise, Sarner informs us that there is this thing called “proportionality bias, where we assume that if something big happens, such as a terrorist attack or a president being assassinated, something big must have caused it.” Think about this in relation to Armstrongism. All of the violence, chaos and confusion in the world made sense to us when we viewed it through the lens of Herbie’s teachings. Yes, the devil had to be behind it all – it would take someone/something that powerful to generate this mess!
Finally, Sarner points out that there is evidence to suggest that the folks who are most likely to fall for these theories often experience some level of anxiety or paranoia over their surroundings. Moreover, Sarner concludes that “Recent studies have also found that people who are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories also tend to have a need for uniqueness – a desire to be in the small group of people who are ‘in the know’.” We were among the chosen few who were in the know.
Yes, when we consider the phenomenon of conspiracy theories, it becomes clear to us that we fell for one of the grandest conspiracy theories of all time. As a fellow traveler, I know that the path back to reality and sanity can be very painful. I also know that there was a certain kind of solace and comfort in knowing THE TRUTH, and in being part of the few who were not deceived; but facing reality has its own rewards. After all, we may not be part of a select few; but it can still be inspiring to understand that we share this planet and life with billions of brothers and sisters! What do you think?
23 comments:
It's difficult for me to view Armstrongism as tied into a "conspiracy" theory.
When I think of conspiracy theories, the things that strike out to me are the things like "Flat Earth", "9/11", "UFO's", "The Moon Landing". Each of these has a hint of mystery involved in the larger picture. Each of these events has a subculture of people who question if something was the way it actually was. It's this doubt of reality that causes people to question the actuality of what they're being told, and if what's happening is really the way things are happening.
The other thing conspiracy theorists do is take a thing, explain it as another thing - without really taking the time to learn what the thing really is. In other words, a lot of conspiracy theorists are ignorant of basic knowledge that would explain what has been blatantly propagandized as ordinary. For instance, a conspiracy theorist will take a video of UFO's from space and claim an invasion, without looking into the science of dust particles, physics, and camera anomalies. Ignorance fuels conspiracies.
When it comes to Armstrongism, the only thing I can really think would fully qualify for a conspiracy theory would be the amount of income and where it came from. There's been quite a few people who have questioned the figures.
The story of Armstrongism is really all laid bare in plain text - from beginning to end - if one takes the time to read it for what it is and somehow avoid the snare of Armstrong's duplicity and double talk. There were two stories of the events that unfolded. The one you were told to believe, and the one that was the true story. It'd be easy to fall for a "conspiracy theory" if you never looked into the true story and simply believed what you were told . This means looking beyond the hyperbole of Armstrong and analyzing the big picture, without prejudice or bias with the eyes of a third party.
-SHT
Dear Lake of Fire or Richard or whatever your name is, you wrote on a previous topic:
"MY COMMENT - That would be poster Near Earth Object who says the Church preached exterminating Native Americans. He took personally an absurd comment made to him by a lowly deacon once and extrapolates it in his mind as Churchwide doctrine. My family has 60 years of Armstrongism experience and I have never heard such a teaching from the legalism of the Church that taught the ten commandments and "Thou shalt not kill."
Are you for real? You have as much trouble with the truth as President Immortan Joe.
I did hear something from a deacon among many, many others. I also heard a Local Elder in a Bible Study on a Wednesday evening explain to a large audience that Native Americans should have been exterminated. There was a pastor rank minister at his elbow who did not correct him. No extrapolation necessary. What is necessary is that you one day come to understand the gross illogic behind your thinking that because you did not personally witness something that it did not exist.
I too have heard many times over the years that since Amerca was given to the Manassehites that we as a nation had every right to exterminate the "gentiles" that occupied our inherited land. The term "gentile" was a racial smear used by many ministers to describe Native Americans, Blacks and Latins in this country. It was "gentiles" committing the crimes, "gentiles" destroying our cities, "gentiles" moving into neighborhoods causing living standards to decline, and more importantly "gentiles" allowed to immigrate to this nation and take over the birthright of the white Manassehites.
When I attended WCG for a very short period of time, the local minister when he was counseling me for baptism asked me my heritage and when I told him I was part Cherokee he said that I should be careful not to let others in the congregation know that I was taken a back by his odd comment. Well, now I know why...
"The Church was infiltrated during the first century with another gospel. Many false teachings and false churches under the name of “traditional Christianity” arose. As God reveals in Revelation 12:9, the whole world has been deceived. These basic truths have been kept a mystery. Even sincere and well-meaning men among the clergy have received their teaching from other men as handed down traditionally in these churches. They have assumed these false teachings to be the true teachings of the Bible. Instead of putting the various pieces of the jigsaw puzzle properly and sensibly together, it has become the practice and custom to read an already-believed false teaching into each particular scripture, taken out of context. In other words to interpret the scriptures to say what they have already been taught and come to believe. The Bible needs no interpretation because it interprets itself. This becomes clear when one sees the various scriptures of each subject properly put together, as the Bible itself says, “here a little, and there a little” (Isaiah 28:10). Even the world of a professed traditional Christianity has been deceived." --Mystery of the Ages by Herbert Armstrong
"Thereupon this Simon appropriated the NAME of Christ, calling his Babylonian mystery religion 'Christianity.' Satan moved this man and used him as his instrument to persecute and all but destroy the true Church of God. Before the end of the first century — probably by A.D. 70 — he managed to suppress the message Christ had brought from God.
There ensued 'the lost century' in the history of the true Church of God. There was a well-organized conspiracy to blot out all record of Church history during that period. A hundred years later, history reveals a "Christianity" utterly unlike the Church Christ founded." --The Incredible Human Potential by Herbert Armstrong
I would say that the justification for annihilating Native Americans was implied in the doctrine of Anglo-Israelism. Like the Israelites of old who were expected to expel/eradicate/supplant the Canaanites, early European settlers were expected to take possession of the new promised land.
We know too that White Europeans viewed their culture and religion as being superior to the natives of this continent (whom they viewed as heathen savages). This view evolved into the phenomenon known as Manifest Destiny (that God intended for the United States to extend from the Atlantic to the Pacific).
For Armstrong and his followers, America was the fulfillment of God's promises to Abraham. God's word must stand, nothing could be allowed to thwart the will of God (and it was most assuredly His will that Manasseh inherit this land!
From the booklet "The United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy" by H.W. Armstrong:
"But these Israelites who possessed the Birthright eventually
were to come to a new land of their own. The Eternal
says, in II Samuel 7:10, and I Chronicles 17:9: "Moreover, I will
appoint a place for my people Israel, and will PLANT THEM
(Jeremiah was commissioned to do the planting of the throne
among them) that they may dwell in a place of their own and
move no more." The context of the whole passage shows this
refers, not to Palestine, but a different land where these scattered
Israelites were to gather, after being removed from the
promised land of Palestine, and while that land was lying
idle and in possession of the Gentiles."
Re: Miller
The "conspiracy" Miller alludes to is akin to "the great controversy."
It was the adventist claim of Satan's original conspiracy against God (s) creation. And the latters later use of the "Babylonian mystery religion infiltration" of "christianity." Which could be obvious depending on the angle one looks at (its) philosophy.
Dennis made an effort to enlighten is somewhat on astrology, the study of the stars and how that translated into holy books. In britain celtic crosses witness of the hybrid between the old and new philosophy.
Personally I liked "a world held captive" better. Since only now after the 2008 crisis the veil has been lifted somewhat on the financial complex usually hidden for the ordinary person on distant (off) shores. Of course hwa was talking about satan again but re read the booklet with the banking crises in mind.
Re:NEO
I am prepared to offer him the slack that wcg never spoke out against the atrocities that went along with "abrahams blessing." And I guess ministers and members in Kansas never healed from moral injury and the trauma in that region.
It is even true that by extension one could even rationalize that the extermination of the native had been a function of "abrahams blessing."
I do however fully agree with Richard lake of fire. It was never doctrine or even officially taught.
(except perhaps in wichita and brought to pasadena by ac students from wichita)
99 percent of wcg folk who may have thought about the "collateral" of "abrahams blessing" would have rationalized that the natives "did not go along with the blessings bestowed upon the mannasites and even rebelled against it."
But active propagation of genocide on wcg circles again is utter nonsense
Whatever local wichitans or outback australians or south african boers might have contributed to that discussion.
Nck
Another example of a wise minister knowing his flock.
The heritage in itself was not an impediment to joining that flock or even marrying "Gods chosen apostle".
The only "cherokee" I know sings "the latte boy" very well. (kirstin)
Nck
Miller
Thanks for sharing the original sources.
The specific booklets you are quoting were about as close as required reading before baptism as one could get. One could not have overlooked it.
So far NO one has come forward as to, yeah the extermination of the native is what attracted me to armstrongism originally until pastor nck watered it down to "not going with the blessing collateral damage", then I left those sissies to join another brotherhood.
Nice fellows such as yourself must have had rationalizations. The closest I can think of was that the focus was on the "blessings" not on the "collateral."
I have made it an effort on this blog to quote from a lot of "collateral" in order to make a case that Armstrongism was an ideology in full support of American expansionism as started through the conquest of "the West". As the McCain funeral was very clear about America's mission as a shining beacon from the city on the hill. It is the "McCain"s and McWhatevers of this world that NEO has labeled, ingrate inbred agressive mountain tribalists from Scotland. Which I like to a degree since I enjoy movies on the Appalachian mountain clans. I guess it is NEO's way of saying sorry for his kin that brought all of them over. Which again I like very much since it is a hobby of mine to visit all ports of departure and arrival.
nck
The genome project disproves the belief that most white Americans are desendents of one our more of the lost tribes of Isreal. HWA was wrong!
HWA in his book Mystery of the Ages states that Noah will be in charge of reestablishing the locations for the different races keeping them separate for their own peace and happiness.
nck, thanks for your kind words.
As with many others, I did rationalize and focus on the blessings; but that is not an excuse (I should have known better). As they say, hindsight is 20/20. However, in our attempt to help others with the fallout from having been associated with Armstrongism, we must not lose sight of how it felt when we began to realize that we had been hoodwinked (and most of us, at least initially, were not anxious to examine our own culpability in that process). Now, we see clearly where WE went wrong, but that also doesn't negate the part that the purveyor of the conspiracy theory played in that process. I think that the most important lesson that I've learned as a result of this experience is to be more skeptical - to be more intellectually curious and less likely to act like a fish and swallow bright, shiny objects that are dangled before me by unscrupulous fishermen! My thanks to everyone on this blog (and in other places) who work to enlighten others and promote intellectual rigor.
I don't know if people "should have known better" regarding conspiracy theories.
As the doctor recently said to me: "I haven't seen you in a while!" Of course not, I replied, I've been sick!
nck
NO2HWA said,"I too have heard many times over the years that since Amerca was given to the Manassehites that we as a nation had every right to exterminate the "gentiles" that occupied our inherited land".
MY COMMENT - I know this controversial discussion is "off topic" however its been festering for months now so I ask your indulgence.
I draw the distinction in your statement above where you said "that we as a NATION had every right to exterminate Gentiles" in stark contrast to stating "that we as a CHURCH had every right to exterminate the Gentiles". A BIG AND HUGE DIFFERENCE!
Hey, I don't believe in British Israelism (BI), but what I think you and perhaps NEO are saying is that WCG ministers were saying from the pulpit that the USA had the right to exterminate Native American "Gentiles" because the national physical birthright inheritance of the promised land belonged to Manasseh. It was said in retrospective history from the BI point of view. And I get the derogative phraseology of the term "Gentile". Now that I CAN believe occurred in WCG although I never heard it preached in my local Church area. But the Church was not advocating and telling its members, "Go ye therefore and kill every Native American you can find - you're justified in doing so" That didn't occur.
Other than beating the children with spanking boards, and Vince Panella telling the Baltimore, Md. WCG how to deal with a rebellious wife - "you rape her" (his words) - I don't ever remember the physical violence and killing advocated from the pulpits of the WCG. We were taught "Thou shalt not kill".
I hope this distinction between "Nation" and "Church" clarifies this controversy in peoples' minds. At least it did in mine.
Richard
We were told not to believe HWA but to believe the Bible, and to prove it for ourselves.
If we had kept doing it, we would have seen not all our beliefs were in the Bible, and not all the Bible was in our beliefs.
My adult son recently asked my wife if Dad (me) still goes to the church that cherry picks things out of the old testament. While I think we are better than that, it is interesting that he came up with this viewpoint.
I have been preparing a list of points that I would like to post here, if I can do it anonymously - since I like to live in peace.
Anon 5:38,
Sounds like some good postings. I generally take the COGs as a net negative in my life, and as time goes on it is more of a net negative. Early on it might have been a net positive if I'd moved away from it after just a few years. But, maybe even that is generous; most of the things that set it apart from mainstream Christianity were fabrications. The Sabbath and the soul are the only teachings I put much value in and none of these were unique to WCG. It is the "not all the Bible was in our beliefs" portion that I'm seeing so much more of, that is how it injures Christians.
"My adult son recently asked my wife if Dad (me) still goes to the church that cherry picks things out of the old testament. "
"While I think we are better than that, it is interesting that he came up with this viewpoint."
I hate to break the news, but that's exactly what has been done. That's exactly what the COG splinters continue to do. It isn't difficult to research this exactly to see that that was the M.O. for the churches.
How many times during a sermon, sermonette, booklet, or article, was context ignored for one scripture to confirm their position? How many times was the verse(s) that followed one key verse ignored, changed, or modified to support a set viewpoint? It happened constantly.
It was even the case that sections of single verses were omitted or changed where appropriate to fit a position, ignoring the entire context of the subject.
The truth is - every single position was learned first through HWA who "canonized" it into WCG dogma. Then, the executive staff went to work to take the scriptures to prove that position. Hoeh was an expert at this methodology. This is how the so-called "master plan of God as revealed through the Sabbath and Holy Days" was developed, as well as many of the other doctrines. It's the defining method adopted to brand HWA's type of religion. The Bible was not interpreted for contextual truth. HWA interpreted the Bible to confirm his own bias and opinion - from "a clean slate" where every single "christian" teaching was thrown out and he developed everything himself - using the Sabbath and Holy Days and front-to-back whole chronology as the absolute foundation for all understanding - according to Herbert, that is.
-SHT
NCK, your strategy is to believe that there was never ever more than a tiny clique of people who believed in the extermination of Native Americans. And I just happen to come into contact with that small clique. This doesn't fly. The sample I had was way too broad with regard to geography and caste. It would be interesting for someone to run a survey of splinter groups to determine how many believe in this kind of genocide.
Lake of Fire, I have never asserted that the WCG commanded its members to exterminate Native Americans. They only conceptually advocated the extermination of Native Americans. It was taught that it was one of the great failings of the original British colonists that they did not exterminate the Native Americans just like in the Bible it was a great sin of Israel that they did not exterminate all of the Canaanites as God commanded.
The goal of WCG preachment on this topic was to draw an exact parallel between the ancient Israelites occupying the Promised Land and the modern "Israelites" entering North America. Exact - as a neat support to BI. The WCG even went so far as to claim that Native Americans, in spite of being of Asian origin, were Middle Eastern Canaanites. (Why do you think Hoeh went out of his way in The Compendium, Vol. 1 to establish the ridiculous notion that Native Americans were Canaanites?) The storied deacon and his wife in declaring "Wipe 'em out!!" were not recommending this as a WCG practice but offered it as a principle that the early American "Israelites" should have followed. The deacon is now an ardent listener to Fox News to show you where his heart is.
But by advocating the principle of genocide for others, they are themselves tainted by it. They demonstrate that under the right circumstances, in their hearts, they could be just as genocidal as Nazis. We never had HWA direct his people to start killing American Indians so at this time, we do not know what members of the WCG would have done. I believe some of them would have gotten their rifles out of the closet and would have gone after it with glee if they felt they could escape law enforcement. There were some really bizarre Warboys in the WCG. But this is speculation on my part.
I think the average member of the WCG never thought about this topic. But if he/she did, there was a packaged belief ready for them - likely available only from the local ministry or local membership. In my experience the advocacy of Native American genocide was a local product. But somewhere in WCG history the idea must have been initiated by someone with some Armstrongist cred. So I do not grant WCG leadership absolution on this odious and sick belief.
NEO. To whom it applies, like the "John Ford" generation, they have things to atone for, that only the "Post - Dances with wolves" generation started to realize or came to appreciate. (or should I say John J. Rambo (2) who by all accounts used the bow and arrow and apache bandana to redeem America after saying the historical words to colonel Decker: "Do we get to win this time?")
I'm satisfied with your assesment that the average member philosophically was probably more concerned on what barbeque sauce to spend 2nd tithe on. For certain the Tanzanian, Kenyan, French, Caribean, German, Philipine members never heard the message you speak of. I cannot vouch for the Australian outback, South Africa, Vancouver BC, Wichita Kansas congregations though that on occassion questions might have arisen regarding the native inhabitant of the blessed lands.
My apologies to Miller for kind of being of topic on the "conspiracy thing". But hey it's 9/11 so there is enough of that already.
nck
Whoa. Col Decker is of course the fictional A-team character. I'm sorry.
I'm talking Col Trautman to whom Vietnam Vet JJR asks "Do we get to win this time?" Just before he accepts his commission and dresses up as a native american to redeem the USA (from trauma) with bow and arrow and excessive violence (in 1985).
Which was really the first time this was done in comparison to evasives like Magnum (Tom Seleck) who only alluded to his status as Vet or a series like "Mash" for all painful memories needed to be placed in Korea instead of Vietnam.
Only after "Dances with wolves" the native regained human status again for the general public going toward "Windtalkers" et all.
nck
NEO,
Now that we've peeled back the onion, I now understand and get where you are coming from, and I agree. The Church taught British-Israelism and from a BI perspective created an undertone or undercurrent in the Church as it relates to Native Americans or Gentiles in general. Add Herman Hoeh's Compendium and it only adds toxic gases to the fire. In my mind, what you have described is the result of Armstrongism's mixing of the Old Testament (Physical Israel, National promises and history) with the New Testament (Spiritual & Church "Neither Jew nor Greek, male nor female")
Your posts about 4 months ago made it sound like you were saying that the WCG encouraged its members to go exterminate Native Americans which is what I was objecting to. You may not have meant it, but that was the way it was coming across. Thanks for clarifying.
Richard
Post a Comment