Christian and Conspiracies

There seems to a habit of some in the Christian community to use phrases like “outrageous conspiracy theorist ” when referring to people, such as myself, who have taken the time to explore alternate models to explain the phenomena we are observing, namely that some people are getting sick and dying of something. Granted that there are some who listen to a convincing sounding hypothesis and immediately believe it is true and nefarious. 

My position is that any hypothesis that presents a new model should be considered and subject to experimentation. Interestingly enough, I have yet to talk to anyone who dogmatically adheres to the narrative and eschews alternate theories that has actually done much research on either spectrum. They accept the narrative because everyone “knows” there is a virus. Conversely there is the other type that reject it because some other model satisfies their default persuasions.

For two months now I have been consuming copious amounts of information and what I am concluding is that there are copious amounts of information I have not even touched. However, it is clear to me that this destruction of our society and economy is not an appropriate response given the actual facts. 

Church leaders who use the term “outrageous conspiracy theories” when referring to hypotheses they are thoroughly ignorant of are at best weak minded leaders. If we believe that Satan is the lord of this world, that he prowls around seeking to devour, that he is a liar, the father of lies and the truth is not in him, and then we see the state telling us that we cannot meet with our family and friends, engage in corporate worship, but we can go to the liquor store or a gay bath house, that the only way we’ll be safe is to implement a contact tracking system and vaccinate everyone on the globe, nuanced thinkers should pause for a moment and wonder what is really going on.

Hitler's War

Today I downloaded the PDF version of historian David Irving's biography, Hitler's War. As I go through this tome I hope to obtain some insight into the happenings of WWII, to understand the position and relationship of the Jews in Germany at the time, and to hopefully separate fact from fiction.

So far the introduction has already provided ample food for thought and promises to deliver on my stated objectives. For example, on page xxv of the introduction:

In 1948 [Hitler’s predecessor as chancellor, Dr. Heinrich] Brüning would write to the editors of Life forbidding them to publish an August 1937 letter he had written to Winston Churchill revealing that ‘from October 1928 the two largest regular contributors to the Nazi Party were the general managers of two of the largest Berlin banks, both of Jewish faith, and one of them the leader of Zionism in Germany.’*

 Irving goes on to state that:

I had approached the Nazi maltreatment of the Jews from the traditional viewpoint prevailing in the 1960s. Supposing Hitler was a capable statesman and a gifted commander, the argument ran, how does one explain his ‘murder of six million Jews’? 

And then:

For a full length war biography of Hitler, I felt that a more analytical approach to the key questions was necessary. Remarkably, I found that Hitler’s own role in the ‘Final Solution’ had never been examined. German historians, otherwise the epitome of painstaking essaying, had developed monumental blind spots when Hitler himself cropped up: bald statements were made without a shadow of evidence in support. British and American historians willingly conformed. Others quoted them. For thirty years our knowledge of Hitler’s part in the atrocity had rested on inter historian incest. 

Well then, this promises to be interesting.  We shall see.