Exposing the Machiavellian Solution
“Let’s change the way we live, and let’s change the way we treat each other. You see the old way wasn’t working. So it’s on us to do what we gotta do… to survive.” –Tupac Shakur, etc., “Changes”
On 1 Jun 2024, Caleb Campbell -the lead pastor of Desert Springs Bible Church of Phoenix, Arizona-posted the following message on X, the social media platform formerly known as Twitter: “The witness of the church is marred when we claim the name of the Messiah while following the way of Machiavelli.”
Although I had never heard of Pastor Campbell prior to noticing the post, I found his comment intriguing. It prompted me to learn more about Machiavelli.
Like many, I recognized that Machiavelli is a name synonymous with evil-doing, but I did not know much about the details of his contribution to Western thought, nor could I precisely define what it means to “follow the way of Machiavelli”. So I turned to Professor Michael Sugrue, whose fantastic lectures are available on the internet. Links to two lectures are presently available
Here, (circa ~1990): https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFaYLR_1aryjfB7hLrKGRaQ
and here (circa ~2022) :
Both lectures are well worth your time. Several portions of what I transcripted will be scattered throughout. I wish to begin by quoting a few of Prof. Sugrue’s passages to build a foundation for understanding several disturbing current events.
Prof. Sugrue: “Machiavelli (1469-1527) lives through the biggest single transformation in the last 5,000 years – which is the permanent connection of the Old World and the New World. [..] In Europe, the encounter with the New World was transformative. Authority lost some of its luster. Why? Because if the Ancients didn’t know about half the World, what else don’t they know about? So there was a crisis of authority – both intellectual and political. The other big thing that happens is that an enormous amount of money flows from the New World into Spain. And from Spain, that money is spent all through Europe. And from there, it actually mostly ends up in China. [..] The Spanish will become particularly powerful. The French are also very powerful. But regrettably, Italy is broken up into city-states (Rome, Florence, Milan, Venice, etc.). And these fight among themselves, and they make it easy for Italy to become a political football. [..] So Machiavelli is very attuned to the disorganization of Italian politics, and part of why he wrote The Prince (his landmark in Renaissance writing) is because he wants some great Italian leader to step up, do what needs to be done, and get rid of what he calls the Barbarians. And in this case, the Barbarians are the French and the Spanish… outsiders.” [..]
“In the Western tradition, the great thinkers of both Greece and Rome worked hard to create some sort of connection between politics and ethics (e.g., Plato and Aristotle, Cicero and Tacitus). But in Machiavelli, we see someone who has the power, the honesty, and the strength to sever politics from ethics – and instead connect it to the physical world. In other words, it just is what is it is.” [..]
“So what Machiavelli is trying to do in his book, The Prince, is to show a ruler how to win – not how to get to Heaven, but rather how to achieve power, to gain power, and to extend power. [..] This is not to say that Machiavelli wants his politician to be diabolical, constantly doing evil. That’s not at all a Machiavellian idea. Rather, Machiavelli is trying to show when a ruler needs to select evil or select good – and how to get away with it by appearing good, regardless of whether he has done something good or not.”
“Machiavelli gives lots of examples. In one, there is an Italian ruler who has a harsh and cruel subordinate. He leaves the subordinate in charge of a city he’s just conquered and tells him to be very, very cruel to intimidate the people. Once his subordinate has done that, Machiavelli’s ruler goes back, claims to be shocked at the things that his subordinate is doing and has his subordinate cut in half, leaving both parts of his body in the town square. That’s making a point. The people were amazed to see this cruel subordinate cut in half and came to accept the ruler that had sent him, who engaged in this duplicity because the hard part of imposing his law on the captured city had been taken care of, and now he had gotten the sympathy of those who had been oppressed. What Machiavelli says is- that’s smart politics. [..] Power intrinsically wants to be more. The smart thing to do is to trust no one and to outwit them before they outwit you.”
“The Prince was written in 1513, and Machiavelli was very well versed in Roman history. And this is important because Machiavelli, looking at 16th century Italy, says, ‘We are the descendants of the great Romans – the men who built an empire that shook the world. And we can’t even unify Italy, we fight amongst ourselves. So what Machiavelli always has in the back of his mind is the Glory of Rome. [..] But that greatness cannot be recovered by a ruler that is fastened to Christian morality.”[..]
“The Homeric virtues, the military virtues, the treacherous political virtues, those elements of Roman history which are the most disgraceful and the most appalling – Machiavelli wishes to raise these to the status of universal human felicity. [..] What Machiavelli wants is a ‘good’ practical politician that will lie and scheme his way to the top. And once he gets to the top of a particular city-state, he will attack one city-state after another and unify Italy and create something like a new Roman Empire. There can be a new glory, a new this-worldly satisfaction of the potential for human greatness. Remember that Machiavelli is opposed to all metaphysical interpretations of the world. Machiavelli does not believe in Heaven and Hell. Machiavelli does not believe in God. Machiavelli does not believe in the Realm of the Forms (of Socrates). All Machiavelli believes in is here and now –the main chance: how we are going to get what we want right now.”
***
Some context for Pastor Caleb Campbell’s statement (“The witness of the church is marred when we claim the name of the Messiah while following the way of Machiavelli.”) is provided by an interchange on Twitter/X between himself and a popular social media personality and journalist, Julie Roys, dated 12 April 2024. In a response to Pastor Caleb Campbell, Julie Roys replies, “I really appreciate the stand you’ve taken against Christian Nationalism.”
In another exchange, Julie Roys quoted Campbell’s criticism of Promise Keepers, a group well-known among Christians, when he queried “Will they platform anyone?” after Promise Keepers invited Dr. Phil McGraw and Charlie Kirk to participate in an event. A reply thanking Julie Roys was subsequently issued from a poster with the handle “Disarming Leviathan”, associated with the publication of Pastor Caleb Campbell’s new book of the same title and with the subtitle, “Loving Your Christian Nationalist Neighbor”.
For those who are unfamiliar, one might gain a sense of what Pastor Campbell wishes to convey by the term, “Christian Nationalist”, with this meme and photograph.
I’ll return to “Christian Nationalism” and Campbell’s book, “Disarming Leviathan” momentarily. Here, it is enlightening to describe a most peculiar set of events- and what appears to be a serious crime- which took place in March 2023 in San Diego, California and directly involves Julie Roys.
***
The striking sequence of events was originally described by a City of Coronado Police Department post on Facebook the morning of the incident, 22 March 2023. “At 10:15 am this morning, a 62-year-old man was attempting to parallel park his truck in the 900 block of Orange Avenue when he struck the vehicle parked in front of him which was occupied by a 59-year-old woman. As the woman got out of her car to talk to the man, he jumped out of his truck and attacked the victim. As he was assaulting the woman, his truck rolled backwards striking the vehicle parked behind him. Witnesses came to the victims aide, and stopped the man from leaving the area. Officers arrived on scene, arrested the suspect and also found a stolen handgun inside his truck. The victim was transported to the hospital with serious injuries. The roadway was closed for approximately 1 ½ hours while officers investigated the incident.”
One highly-‘liked’ response to the post praised the actions of the witnesses. Despite the picture of the gun and description of it being stolen, it later turned out that the gun was not stolen. https://www.facebook.com/CoronadoPolice/posts/pfbid0nFzpiJamztWZkKGH4E8seLvFdyLoMtMDMZyrpDu5P25qUu5k4rdbtnHicisVneMPl
One of the most detailed and enlightening accounts of the subsequent activities was both written and published on 28 Feb 2024 by Julie Roys, describing a subsequent court hearing, on her website at: https://julieroys.com/judge-postpones-mental-health-diversion-hearing-in-james-macdonalds-assault-case/
The full account, “Judge Postpones Mental Health Diversion Hearing in James MacDonald’s Assault Case”, is replicated in images here because it contains so many remarkable and unexpected associations. The first question one might pose is, “Who is James MacDonald?” Roys points out rather that James MacDonald was fired from the Chicago-area Harvest Bible Chapel in February 2019 for actions “contrary and harmful to the best interests of the church”. She states that his firing (and excommunication) stemmed from a combination of her own series of reports on MacDonald and a “vulgar hot microphone” recording of MacDonald.
Notably, Dr. Shannae Anderson, an expert witness for James MacDonald, asserted that “MacDonald’s actions on 22 March 2023 was a function of MacDonald’s post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). According to Dr. Anderson- whose own son reportedly “survived a mass-shooting event by jumping out a window”(https://www.mpacorn.com/articles/each-borderline-survivor-processes-trauma-differently ) - the PTSD was caused by Julie Roys’s reporting on MacDonald.”
In other words, James MacDonald’s legal defense is that the actions of Julie Roys – the author and publisher of the referenced article- caused so much traumatic stress that it caused him to assault a random woman he did not know. “’Once the woman in the car in front of (MacDonald) got out of the car and moved towards him in an angry and agitated state, the years of traumatic memories of being vilified by Julie Roys rushed back to him and triggered a fight or flight response,’ Anderson stated in her report. ‘Feeling powerless and misunderstood and essentially trapped in his truck, he got out of the vehicle to fight back against his accuser.’”
It is worth remarking that the woman who stepped out of the car and was assaulted, Barbara Bass, is married to Stephen Bass, who (per Julie Roys) “is a retired Navy Seal and the first person to earn the Navy Cross since 1989.” His exploits have been described in several books, some of which are described in a link provided by the Roys article. Stephen Bass recently was also mentioned in a 19 Oct 2021 Business Insider article ( https://www.businessinsider.com/aukus-security-pact-follows-decades-of-special-ops-cooperation-2021-10 ):
“In the weeks after the September 11 attacks, US and coalition special-operations forces joined anti-Taliban fighters to topple the Taliban and Al Qaeda. While Delta Force was looking for Osama Bin Laden in the Tora Bora mountains, hundreds of Taliban prisoners held a fortress in Mazar-e-Sharif revolted, killing CIA officer Mike Spann, the first American to die in Afghanistan. Green Berets, CIA officers, and an SBS team joined anti-Taliban fighters and swiftly quelled the revolt. The actions of one SBS member revealed the extent of these exchange programs. Chief Petty Officer Stephen Bass received the Navy Cross citation, the US’s second-highest award for valor, and the British Military Cross. Although the Navy Cross citation said Bass’ parent unit was SEAL Team 1, he was in fact a SEAL Team 6 operator on a two-year exchange program with the British.”
It is also notable that the judge in the MacDonald case, Judge Enrique Camarena “also mentioned that one of MacDonald’s defense lawyers, Michael Pancer, defended the man convicted of murdering Camarena’s father, former DEA agent, Enrique ‘Kiki’ Camarena in 1985.” Michael Pancer’s remarks were published in a UPI article in 1988 ( https://www.upi.com/Archives/1988/09/19/Defense-says-US-perverted-Mexican-murder-trial/6079590644800/ ):
“There has been so little regard for the facts in this case by the government that it's embarrassing. It's insulting,' Pancer said. 'Are (prosecutors) being magicians and flim-flam artists? 'It's difficult, on behalf of (his client) Rene Verdugo, not to get angry when I'm talking about what the government is doing. [.. ] They have twisted and perverted the evidence and misargued it at every opportunity.' Pancer accused the government of unprecedented corruption in trying to convict Verdugo. [..] (Pancer) said the most outrageous thing the prosecutors did involved the testimony of Manuel Calderon, a witness who testified he saw Verdugo and Felix together twice. Calderon, who testified he was wanted for two murders in Mexico, identified Verdugo's picture with certainty only after the government repeatedly showed him photos, including one extra-large picture of Verdugo wearing the clothes he wears to court, Pancer said. 'It's outrageous,' Pancer said. 'If a defense attorney did that, if a defense investigator did that, we could go to jail. That's tampering with a witness. That's obstruction of justice. ... It has never happened in a courtroom before, never.’”
A more recent (July 2020) report on the murder of Enrique Camarena was published in the Daily Beast ( https://web.archive.org/web/20200801070600/https://www.thedailybeast.com/did-the-cia-torture-an-undercover-dea-agent-for-a-mexican-drug-cartel ) and describes several alternative theories, which are explored in a documentary aired on Amazon.
So many well-known people are involved in this case, it is downright spooky.
The story states that, “The incident required [..] Barbara Bass to be hospitalized for 21 days.” This seems to me to be quite a long period of time. It later adds, “Still recovering from the injuries she received on March 22, Bass walked slowly with the help of a cane. Once in the courtroom, where MacDonald was present, Bass’s body began to shake. After leaving the courtroom, she went to the waiting room in the prosecutor’s office, sat down, put her head in her hands, and cried.”
Medical records are private, so there is no easy way to verify the accuracy of this report of a 21-day hospital stay and injuries which are so severe as to persist nearly a year after “the incident on March 22”. However, if I had no other choice but to hazard a guess, my opinion is that both her 21-day stay and the severity of the injury reflected in the article are real. I do wonder, though, whether she might have experienced any complications during surgery.
***
Pause to reflect on what might compel a man in his 60’s to assault a woman exiting a parked car simply because she somehow made him think of a different woman, Julie Roys.
One article which might have influenced the judge to consider PTSD as a reasonable defense is titled, “James MacDonald and Target of His Alleged Murder Plot Make Video Espousing Love; More Disturbing Stories.” (https://julieroys.com/james-macdonald-disturbing-stories )
The article was written by Julie Roys herself and includes the following commentary:
“Earlier this week, I reported allegations that MacDonald plotted to kill his former son-in-law, Tony Groves, in 2015. I also reported allegations that MacDonald directed two former employees to spy on Groves. [..] A target of one of MacDonald’s alleged murder plots told police that he had ‘heard MacDonald talk about harming people he didn’t like in the past,’ so ‘he was not surprised’ by reports that MacDonald sought to kill him.”
Another source( https://protestia.com/2022/03/31/julie-roys-fake-charity-is-abusing-tax-laws-subjecting-her-supporters-to-irs-prosecution/ ) alleged misrepresentation by Julie Roys related to tax-status:
“Near the beginning of 2019, Julie Roys changed her Julie Roys website to add a menu link directing readers to a ‘Donate’ page where they could send tax-deductible ‘gifts’ to ‘be equipped to discern the truth’ and ‘help Julie continue her important work.’ The page added, ‘Donations are tax-deductible through a partnership with Judson University.’ [..] While Roys’ website now looks like a charity, in reality, she is using Judson University as a ‘mere conduit’ to launder financial support for her activist journalism through a (for now) actual charity so supporters of her attack pieces can write her salary off of their taxes. This is an illegal application of fiscal sponsorship according to IRS guidance and exposes her ‘donors’ to tax-related prosecution. Likewise, whoever approved this deal at Judson has exposed the school to the possibility of losing its tax-exempt status.”
Another controversy led Julie Roys to drop out of a conference she herself hosted due to passages written in her book. The passages are described in great detail at https://watchkeep.org/2022/04/discussion-of-julie-roys-book-redeeming-the-feminine-soul .
As quoted from this source, the passages included:
“Everything had begun innocuously enough. Sarah (not her real name) was a troubled teen whose tumultuous home life drove her to self-destructive behavior, and as her youth leader, I tried to help her. But my need to rescue her was sabotaging my marriage. [..] How did I get entangled in an emotionally dysfunctional relationship with a former student in our church youth group. [..] I had become emotionally hooked, and the thought of ending the relationship killed me. I wasn’t the only straight person who ever got sucked into her emotional vortex, and I thank God my relationship with (her) never developed into anything physical.”
The withdrawal from the conference and apology are described at:
which published the statement issued by Julie Roys. On Twitter/X, she noted “I released a statement last week, apologizing for assigning blame to someone who didn’t deserve it and failing to understand the position of power I had held.” In a related explanation, Julie Roys noted that the individual described as a “troubled teen” was 19 years old.
Any reasonable editor and publisher team whose goal was presumably to sell books and raise the stature of Julie Roys among Christians surely would have noticed that the description of a 19-year-old as a “teenager” rather than specifying her precise age or describing her as a “young adult” would have disturbed many of Roys’s supporters, as well as her critics.
In addition, to reporting on James MacDonald, The Roys Report covers stories related to what some term “Christian Nationalism”. For example, from:
( https://julieroys.com/bad-faith-sounds-alarm-past-future-christian-nationalism/ ) posted 30 May 2024
“In ‘Bad Faith: Christian Nationalism’s Unholy War on Democracy,’ filmmakers Stephen Ujlaki and Chris Jones trace the origins of Christian nationalism from the Ku Klux Klan in the 19th century through the creation of the Moral Majority, the sudden rise of the tea party and the election of Donald Trump. [..] Ujlaki spoke in an interview by phone in Los Angeles about the making of ‘Bad Faith’ and the story it tells of how a large swath of religious voters came to believe that President Joe Biden is in league with the devil while Trump is essential to the spiritual salvation of America. [..]
Excerpts of the interview of filmmaker, Uljaki include:
“When Trump got elected, I was shocked. Nobody thought he had a chance. He was obviously a joke. It was never going to happen. [..] (T)hen I discovered all of this plotting, all of these deals, and the fact that those behind them were anti-democratic from the beginning. (‘Christian nationalism’s’ goal is) pure fascism. It’s pure power. They have been wanting and plotting the same thing for 40-plus years. They were incredibly adept at concealing what their motives were. You had to decode what they were saying. When they were talking about re-creating the kingdom of God on Earth, if you thought they were talking about something theological and spiritual, you would be mistaken. They were talking about replacing democracy with theocracy. [..] If you look around you at the divisiveness and the distrust of institutions that exist today in this country, you will realize how incredibly successful they have been in executing their plan. It’s been like a slow-motion revolution in a way, happening bit by bit all over the place.”
The points raised by filmmaker Uljaki will be mentioned later in this piece. If the reader has the opportunity to read the remainder of the interview at the link above, I expect you will find it quite illuminating.
***
If Pastor James MacDonald’s name sounds familiar, it might be due to his brief but influential role in the 2016 US Presidential election. From the Washington Post: https://web.archive.org/web/2016101012042358/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/10/10/misogynistic-trash-megachurch-pastor-from-trumps-own-evangelical-council-denounces-him/
“James MacDonald, megachurch pastor of Harvest Bible Chapel, a nondenominational evangelical church in Rolling Meadows, Ill., sent an email on Saturday to several members of Trump’s faith council, his campaign liaison and to some who oppose Trump’s candidacy.
‘Mr. Trump’s comments released yesterday — though 10 years ago (he was 60) — are not just sophomoric or locker room banter. They are truly the kind of misogynistic trash that reveals a man to be lecherous and worthless — not the guy who gets politely ignored, but the guy who gets a punch in the head from worthy men who hear him talk that way about women.’
‘If Mr. Trump isn’t seeking our counsel now — 1) to be repentant 2) on how to portray that repentance, then the idea of a faith council (which has deteriorated into influence brokering anyway) is really kind of a joke right?’ MacDonald wrote. ‘I have spent my life helping men get free from such disgusting commentary on women — even writing my doctoral dissertation on self-disclosure of sin among men. I cannot and will not offer help to a man who believes this kind of talk a minor error.’
‘No more defending Mr. Trump as simply foolish or loose lipped,’ MacDonald wrote.”
Despite his criticism of then-candidate Trump, in 2021, Pastor James MacDonald himself described Julie Roys with terms described as “vulgar”.
James MacDonald addressed his own background, touched on his history with Julie Roys, and also provided his perspective on the incident in San Diego on 22 March 2023. The article provides many details, and I have added emphasized with bold font some key words and phrases.
From https://baptistnews.com/article/an-interview-with-james-macdonald/ 20 July 2023
“MacDonald was just another church planter in 1988 when he and his wife started Harvest Bible Chapel with 18 people. This was the beginning of a new era of church planting emphasis among evangelical churches. [..]
MacDonald was arrested in Coronado, Calif., March 22 (2023) and charged with ‘assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury’ and battery with serious bodily injury. Those charges, which could carry a prison term of up to seven years if he were convicted, stem from an incident in which MacDonald was parking his vehicle and hit another vehicle in an adjacent spot. A police report alleged the pastor ‘jumped out of his truck and attacked the victim,’ a 59-year-old woman. He disputes that description.
Throughout all these ordeals, MacDonald has faced an ongoing nemesis in the person of Julie Roys, publisher of The Roys Report, an independent website seeking to hold religious leaders accountable for bad behavior and expose scandal in the church. At one point, MacDonald and the church sued Roys in an attempt to get her to stop writing about him. After the church fired MacDonald, it dropped the lawsuit and reimbursed Roys’ legal fees. MacDonald believes Roys induced “mass hysteria” against him with relentless attacks. ‘She wrote 85 articles about me in 2019,’ he said. The details of the history between MacDonald and Roys are lengthy and complicated. It is true that in the end, her writing did play a major role in MacDonald’s downfall. [..]
One of the big tipping points was accusations of financial mismanagement, particularly a significant debt load he and the elders chose not to disclose to the congregation. [..] ‘You know, some people found out about it. And so, they launched this website against me called the Elephant’s Debt.’ That name was a play on the title of a series of live video conversations with influential pastors hosted by MacDonald under the title The Elephant Room. [..]
The building debt, questions about church finances, disgruntled staff and lay leaders, accusations of bullying and authoritarian leadership, a hot mic that caught him joking — he says — about placing child porn on the computer of a nemesis, internal church fights, jealousy, and on and on.
‘All this broke me down, broke me down, broke me down to where I’m just like, I cry every day,’ he said. ‘I can’t take anything. … My threat response is completely trashed. I have no ability. If somebody brushes past me in the mall, I have to literally stop and make myself know that’s not the same as someone drawing a gun on me.’
And in that condition, he attempted to parallel park his truck in San Diego.
‘I barely touched the lady in front of me. She jumped out of her car and came running at me. And I was so startled that I jumped out of my car and didn’t even put it in park,’ he said. ‘And it rolled into the person behind me, and I reached toward this lady. … And what I think we’ve been able to piece together, there isn’t a video, but I think I blacked out and I fell. The reason I know is because I fell to the ground. I never put my hands underneath me.’”
***
The ‘hot mic’ video described separately by both Roys and MacDonald was posted on the internet at:
And the following article posted by “The Wartburg Watch” provides a written transcript, with excerpts included below.
[02:51] James MacDonald: “So Mark Galli is a certifiable prick...”
[..]
[03:22] James MacDonald: Oh yeah. So I’m suggesting a following: Um, “ [03:22] (correction) “Harold Smith Exposes Himself During T–CT Mishandling of Scandal.” .” (Other man in room laughs in background.) “Mark Galli Acknowledges Ongoing Tension Re: Affair with Julie Roys” . And “Ed’s Stetzer Fails to Stop Unwanted Erection of Christianity Today Tabloid.”
[Man in background and J. Moore laugh]
[03:45] ] James MacDonald: “This is, this is what we’re coming to, like frickin Julie Roys is going to be riding around on a tricycle with a midget on her shoulders.”
[03:51] J. Moore (publicist): “You’re the, you’re the type of client that every publicist has nightmares about.”
[03:57] James MacDonald: “I know. And I’m just telling you, Johnnie. This frickin–Julie Roys is going to be riding around with a midget on her shoulders and Christianity Today is gonna be saying she’s awesome.”
[More laughter from Moore and man in background.]
[04:38] James MacDonald: “No, no I hear ya. And I want–I don’t, I don’t, I definitely don’t want you to feel like your labor’s in vain. So I will do exactly what you said, and I will call off the plan to put child porn on Harold’s computer.”
[JMoore and two men in room in background laugh.]
[04:53] James MacDonald: “I’m calling that off. Bye, Johnnie.”
JMoore: I’ve got a few other people though, if you need to do that.
[05:01] ] James MacDonald: “Oh Johnnie, trust me. Trust me. People have no idea. If if meekness is power under control, I am the meekest man on the face of the earth. I’ve taken no retaliatory action toward all of these people for six years, and I have only with great reluctance filed a lawsuit with a very measured and reasoned explanation. I talked to 10 or 15 Christian leaders to get their advice, including you, on what to do, how to do it. I’ve done everything by the book, you know. It’s only my thought life that’s breaking bad, not my actions.”
[..]
[44:38] James MacDonald: “So, my gosh, 30-years of faithful Bible ministry and not once does Christianity Today (CT) say anything positive about me or Harvest while they celebrate Rob Bell, cheer Brian McLaren, and hero-worship Bill Hybels. Only time they have ever mentioned us in a negative light 2-3 times, fact: CT is Anglican, pseudo-dignity, high church, symphony adoring, pipe organ protecting, (snickers) musty, mild smell of urine, blue hair Methodist-loving mainline, dying, women preacher championing, emerging church adoring, almost good with all-gays, and closet-Palestine promoting Christianity. So of course they attacked me.” (Lots of laughter, hand claps)
***
So what are we to make of this apparently confusing and visceral conflict between Julie Roys and James MacDonald? Both individuals seem to be immensely popular and to have inspired large groups of people with their respective messages. In the case of James MacDonald, his sermons appear to have to a great deal of success and popularity, as evidenced by his 250,000 Twitter/X followers. Meanwhile Roys’s stance on advocacy for financial transparency and visibility of those who have been mistreated somehow by the church hierarchy has been welcomed by many. Yet both seem to have made astonishingly awful errors of judgment which one would not expect from anyone, let alone a strong proponent and representative of the Christian faith. It turns out that one might be able to categorize the behavior of both Julie Roys and James MacDonald with the term “self-sublation” (translated from the German word “autoaufheben”, which was employed by the philosopher Georg Hegel).
From the blogger and author, The Ethical Skeptic:
https://theethicalskeptic.com/2019/11/17/epoche-vanguards-gnosis/
“One of the conditions we would watch for in Intelligence, and which is taught in counter-intelligence graduate schools, is a familiar play called the Machiavelli Solution. The Machiavelli Solution is a manipulation of a Hegelian Dialectic in social or scientific discourse; the condition where two opposing parties are locked in heated and diametrically opposed disagreement on a topic. Beyond such commonplace discourse it is often paramount to watch for manipulation of the dialectic under a special condition called self-sublation; a condition which allows a third, and more importantly a Fourth, critical party to enable gain or power through means of the conflict.”
The Ethical Skeptic article goes on to define the curious term “self-sublation” as having a double-meaning: “both to cancel (or negate) and to preserve at the same time.” Doesn’t “self-sublation” then describe the actions of both Julie Roys and James MacDonald?
“Yes, we watch for the third party in a fight between two equals, but the astute intelligence researcher also both divorces himself from the bifurcation, and watches like a spider, for The Fourth Party stakes, and more importantly, stakeholder -the one who stands to capture gains from this exploit. They are almost always there, whether anyone observes them or not.”The Fourth Party is the one who surreptitiously functions behind the catalyseur (defined as “any entity which stands to gain under the outcome of a lose-lose conflict scenario which they have served to create, abet or foment” ) third party promoting the Machiavelli Solution.”
The Ethical Skeptic provides this succinct definition:
“Machiavelli Solution – a third party creates and/or exploits the self-sublation condition of a Hegelian dialectic bifurcation at play, in order to sustain a conflict between two opposing ideas or groups, and eventually exploit those two groups’ losses into its own gain in power.”
Continuing on:
“However, the Machiavellian Solution catalyseur is not necessarily the one who benefits most inside this charade. [..] The Fourth Party is the unseen agency behind all this. In order to determine the presence or role of The Fourth Party, one must observe for a significant period inside a state of neutrality – be an ally as well as a critic to both sides in the argument – and then begin to gauge the stakes which are at play inside it as well. Is there a benefit to be had? Who would derive such a benefit? – regardless of whether or not that ‘who’ is deemed to exist.”
Julie Roys and James MacDonald certainly appear to be locked in a heated and diametrically opposed narrative. Furthermore, both appear to have engaged in self-sublation. If they were engaged in a controlled dual narrative as part of a Machiavellian Solution, then a third or fourth party would necessarily experience a benefit, perhaps to the detriment of another entity. The question then becomes, “What do Roys and MacDonald have in common?”
First, and perhaps most obvious, both Roys and Mac Donald have generated and supported narratives which cause Christians to refrain from voting for Donald Trump.
Second, both Roys and MacDonald have been paid off by the Harvest Bible Church, with funds which ultimately were derived from the congregants of that church, as referenced in the images below. Although there is speculation about the total amounts, it is unclear how much money actually went to each due to privacy.
Third, both Roys and MacDonald polarized the Harvest Bible Church members (and by extension, other Christians) into two camps. One camp, which perhaps could be described as “blue” supporting Roys while the second, which might be described as “red” supporting MacDonald. Roys and MacDonald often provide their supporters with messages which pleased them. On the other hand, some of the actions carried out by both Roys and MacDonald have placed their own respective supporters in very difficult and uncomfortable positions. For example, Roys’s appeal to congregation members who support her reporting of unethical behavior in the church and her stance on social issues was undermined by her own behavior she described in her book with stark candor. The way in which James MacDonald undermines his own supporters is even more obvious. He not only used language which is appalling to many Christians but also relied on a legal defense of PTSD, due to Roys, in the assault of a woman. Many of the no-nonsense evangelical supporters in his (former) church will find that to be a cop-out and hard to accept at face value. Furthermore, supporters of both Roys and MacDonald may be squeamish about some of their respective reported financial dealings. It is likely that Roys’s supporters would much prefer to discuss the negative aspects of MacDonald rather than to defend Roys. Similarly, I am confident that most MacDonald supporters would much rather describe Roys’s various offenses than to defend his own language and actions.
Still, to assert that a Machiavellian Solution is in the offing, one might prefer to have more evidence of sophistication, especially given the level of deception implied by the term. If Roys and MacDonald were participating in a Machiavellian Solution, what might be the overarching goal of the so-called “fourth party”, as described by The Ethical Skeptic?
One place to begin is the same source with the transcript of the controversial James MacDonald ‘hot mic’.
***
The article is repeated here: https://thewartburgwatch.com/2019/04/17/here-is-the-entire-james-macdonalds-hot-mic-transcript-this-is-a-new-friendship-with-christianity-today/
(And here as archived: https://web.archive.org/web/20231202191539/https://thewartburgwatch.com/2019/04/17/here-is-the-entire-james-macdonalds-hot-mic-transcript-this-is-a-new-friendship-with-christianity-today/ )
Interestingly, the article opens with a picture of a comet with a starry background. The caption reads “Comet ISON streaks to the sun.” Those of you who are familiar with astronomy may know that the tail of a comet always points away from the sun, no matter what direction the comet is actually going. For example, if a comet itself is moving away from the sun, its “tail” would appear to be out in front of it. The reasons why comets appear so relate to radiation pressure and scaling laws. The Way Out substack article “Changing the Climate of Fear and Deception, Part 1” describes the science (which can also easily be found elsewhere with an internet search) and pointed out that a comet is an excellent metaphor for deception because of this very trait.
Now someone might rightly wonder why a contributor to “The Wartburg Watch” would include such a picture at the outset of their piece and might also jump to the conclusion that the author of the piece simply might not know much about comets. At first, this assumption seems logical. After all, displaying a sign of deception at the outset of an article would surely tend to discourage a reader from believing the rest of it. However, it turns out that Machiavelli himself was known to provide subtle hints about his intentions in what you might think of as a coded fashion:
Prof. Sugrue: “No one is more practical than Niccolo Machiavelli. He dedicates his book (The Prince) to one of his Medici family, and it is one of the most flowering, and flattering, and adoring introductions one could possibly imagine. And of course, it is no less cynical than the rest of the book. The book itself tells the wise prince, the monarch- he who would be tyrant- that he must be very careful to avoid flatterers because flatterers are dangerous men..., your Noble Highness. A clever fellow like the Medici for whom Machiavelli is writing the book, is going to see through the introduction. But then wonder, do I want this guy on my side, or do I want him on someone else’s side? This is a very difficult concern for a real prince.”
An alternative explanation for the curious opening picture and caption in the article is that its author(s) are signifying the misdirection, while casting a “knowing wink” to collaborators.
A second observation is the quote by C.S. Lewis included in The Wartburg Watch piece. While he is well-known for his authorship of Narnia series, some observers believe his claim to be a born-again Christian is itself a misdirection from Lewis himself. The following falls into this category and are selected passages from the link are included below.
https://biblescienceforum.com/2016/06/09/lupus-occultus-the-paganised-christianity-of-c-s-lewis
“Lewis was a high Anglican with strong leanings toward the Roman Catholic Church. Raised in the Church of Ireland, he worked through an atheistic phase in his youth to become a theist – a believer in a deity, but not yet a Christian. His alleged conversion came in 1931, when he was aged 33 or thereabouts and a tenured academic at Oxford. He then joined the Church of England, even though his close friend, JRR Tolkien, wanted him to enter the Roman Catholic Church. [..]”
“Most Americans are unaware of the extent to which the English academia in the 18th and 19th centuries was steeped in the literature, history and mythology of Greece and Rome. Furthermore, with countless members of the ruling elite and the upper middle class serving in India and the Middle East, they were exposed to, and greatly influenced by, the religious traditions and mythologies of the Orient. This led to the widely-held belief that all religions were fundamentally mythological in character and that, while they served a useful social function, they were either (a) devoid of any absolute truth or (b) expressions of a universal moral truth common to all religions. It was the latter stream from which English Freemasonry drew and from which the spiritual ethos of Oxford and Cambridge was formed. [..]”
“I was surprised to learn that millions of Bible-believing Christians in the US were looking to Lewis for guidance and edification. Most members of the New Age, especially those who have read widely and met with representatives of its various branches, know that C.S. Lewis is simply a vehicle for drawing new converts into paganism and the New Age movement. He does this by the time-honoured method – pretend to be a friend, use the right terminology, and slowly draw your audience in another direction.”
The same article points out that:
“Lewis was moulded in the long tradition of high-Anglican British atheism, spiritism and oriental thought. Long before John Dee and Edward Kelly, two high level occultists who advised Queen Elizabeth I, a large segment of the English upper classes was involved in magic and a study of the occult books which started to flow into Europe after the Crusades.”
(The influence of John Dee is also described in:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0039368111001178 )
Perhaps it is a coincidence that The Wartburg Watch article was posted by “dee” on 17 April 2019, including the “Hot Mic Recording.- October 31, 2018 Transcript”
The poster of the article adds, “I had heard tis audio was going the rounds and was thrilled that it is now available on You Tube. Thanks go out to @ex_harvest and @BraveheartHarv1 who put in a lot of work.”
The mention of @ex_harvest is essential to matters to be described shortly.
First, however, I wish to return to the post mentioned at the outset and its author, Pastor Caleb Campbell.
***
Those visiting the following website, recently archived, will see that Pastor Caleb Campbell is preparing to release the book he authored, “Disarming Leviathan: Loving Your Christian Nationalist Neighbor” on July 2nd, 2024.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240605013344/https://www.disarmingleviathan.com
Before reading further, take a close look at the opening paragraph, copied below, and see if anything looks out of the ordinary.
Did you happen to see that the word “Neighbor”, which is spelled correctly on the book title itself is misspelled. It might be understandable, though sloppy work, to mix up the ‘i’ and the ‘e’, but in this instance the apparent mistake is just plain weird. A letter ‘d’ is added at the end. People do make spelling mistakes from time to time, but is not the point of the web site to market the book? Does it leave a good impression if a word in the book’s subtitle is misspelled? Does is instill confidence that the quality of the writing will be high enough to warrant the time required to read the book? Of course not. Moreover, the font is quite prominent. How could such a mistake get past those who proofread the website, presumably including Rev. Campbell himself?
I am going to suggest that, perhaps like the seemingly ill-chosen use of a comet in the piece above, it might not be a mistake at all. Let’s think of the ‘d’ as an “extra letter”. Let us consider the first phrase of the very first sentence, “Christian Nationalism has taken over large swathes of the United States…” The word ‘swathes’ refers to “a long strip or zone”. However, ‘swathe’ while correct in its usage, is a variation of the word ‘swath’, and ‘swath’ (without the ‘e’) is the more common usage. (In fact, if you look back earlier in this article to the interview with the filmmaker, you find it spelled as “swath”.) This might seem a minor point, but in point of fact, the letter ‘e’ is another extra, unnecessary letter, like the aforementioned letter ‘d’.
Now consider the rest of the phrase, “…and many of us are experiencing the relational fallout of standing against it, in our families, communities, and churches.” If one considers this phrase carefully, it seems to make sense, and there are no spelling mistakes. I would ask you to consider the phrase if it were changed to, “…and many of us are experiencing the real fallout of standing against it, in our families, communities, and churches.” The phrase still makes sense and communicates nearly the same message, does it not? Might not one reasonably consider the “l-a-t-i-o-n” in the word “relational” to be extra letters?
We are then left with the “extra letters” in order: “D - E - L - A - T - I - O - N” which spells the word “delation”.
Most modern dictionaries and spell-checking software do not include the word “delation”, but it does indeed have a meaning, as laid out quite clearly and in excellent detail in this paper titled “By Whom Were Early Christians Persecuted” by James Corke-Webster of King’s College London, UK.
https://academic.oup.com/past/article/26/1/3/6982747
“The persecution of the early Christians in the first three centuries AD (or CE) has proved an enduring historical topic. […] Since Rome had no public prosecution service, accusations had to be made by individuals, so-called delatores — ‘denouncers’ or accusatores — ‘accusers’ — who could gain their information from indices — ‘informers’.
Motives for this process - known as delation - varied. Inimicitia — ‘personal enmity’ - looms large in our extant sources. Financial rewards were not insubstantial too. Accusers in successful prosecutions usually received a share either of the fine of the condemned, or in more serious cases, their confiscated property.”
At first, one might be tempted to scoff or shrug off a connection involving ‘extra letters’, but ‘language games’, wordplay, and even puns are given quite serious contemplation by philosophers like Ludwig Wittgenstein, and especially Martin Heidegger.
Perhaps coincidentally, one might describe the book by Rev. Campbell as accusing Christians of acting unethically to bring about what he might view as an injustice. A potential outcome of the book that Christians who espouse views aligned with those of candidate Trump may be treated poorly, or even persecuted. Might one characterize Rev. Caleb Campbell as a delatore, and the book itself “Disarming Leviathan”, a delation?
Note also that the word “delation” is so closely associated with the Roman Empire, which Machiavelli himself admired so deeply. In fact, the reader may find a recurring theme in this article to be that, “All roads lead to Rome”.
It seems quite remarkable that Pastor Caleb Campbell posted the comment, “The witness of the church is marred when we claim the name of the Messiah while following the way of Machiavelli.” Recall that Machiavelli himself flattered the Medici family profusely and yet proceeded to warn in The Prince to be very suspicious of flatterers? Do you suppose that Rev. Caleb Campbell might be modeling his own behavior after Machiavelli?
https://web.archive.org/web/20240605013344/https://www.disarmingleviathan.com
It turns out that there is another apparent spelling mistake on the same Disarming Leviathan website under the “Podcast” tab.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240605184406/https://www.disarmingleviathan.com/podcast
Believe it or not, the word “Leviathan” is misspelled as “Levithan”. Granted, that is a pretty challenging word to spell. On the other hand… it is in the title of the book which the website is marketing. Seriously, how does one make such a mistake? Could it be that the word Levithan actually alludes to author David Levithan, whose views appear to align very closely with those of Pastor Caleb Campbell. In this article from July 2016,
“Levithan's books explore themes of love, identity and tolerance, and many include protagonists in the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) community. [..]He now serves as editorial director at Scholastic and founding editor of PUSH imprint, a program highlighting young writers in middle and high schools. [..] Levithan is also working on a sequel to his novel ‘Every Day,’ which follows a teen who wakes up in a different body each day.”
It is also worthwhile to consider that the word “disarming” has a dual meaning. As a verb it means to “taking away the means of defense”, but as an adjective it means “endearing”. Might the apparent misspelling of the book title in fact be intentional? Might it be meant to convey that David Levithan is “endearing”?
***
The controversy between Julie Roys and James MacDonald was partially brought about through the work of Scott Bryant and Ryan Mahoney, who initiated a blog titled “Elephant’s Debt. Over a period of several years, “Elephant’s Debt” alleged malfeasance- in financial, spiritual, and legal matters- with regard to Pastor James MacDonald. But in 2018, they were joined by Jessica Hockett, an individual now better known for her Twitter/X platform which focuses on Covid-19 data reporting in the spring of 2020. At the time, Jessica Hockett used the “ex_harvest” Twitter/X handle which was specifically thanked in The Wartburg Watch article with the comet. Posts on Twitter/X indicate that Jessica Hockett used the handle “ex_harvest” as indicated by Julie Roys. Recall also that the “ex_harvest” was also thanked in the post which included the transcript of James MacDonald’s ‘hot mic’, dated October 31, 2018 – just as Jessica Hockett indicated in her interview with Julie Roys.
In fact, as of this writing, the number of followers of Jessica Hockett, though she no longer uses the “ex_harvest” handle on Twitter/X-platform (~59,000) now exceeds that of Julie Roys herself (~48,000).
In June 2019, Julie Roys interviewed Scott Bryant, Ryan Mahoney, and Jessica Hockett.
https://julieroys.com/announcing-the-roys-report-extra-a-follow-up-podcast-on-crusading-bloggers/
The audio file is available at the link. Near the 48-minute mark of the audio file, Julie Roys complimented the group and then described her view of how the alleged malfeasance by James MacDonald was allowed to take place. Thereafter, she gave Jessica Hockett a chance to speak for a few minutes. I transcripted the following:
Julie Roys: “People like you have had courage. When you look in the Book of Revelation, who are the ones standing outside first? First are the cowards. If you lack courage and you’re not willing to speak because it will cost you something, you’re in the wrong business. I think about [..] when persecution comes, we’ve seen a foretaste of it now. I’ve seen it, just in these sets of things. Who stands up? Who turns tail and runs? Who cowardly stands behind someone else? And we need to remember this. [..] How has this impacted you spiritually?”
[The group decides to allow Jessica Hockett to reply first.]
Jessica Hockett: “My understanding of Scripture – and I’m not a Bible scholar- is that wolves, false leaders, unrepentant disqualified elders, and fruitless deeds done in darkness need to be exposed. And it’s hard for me to say that only other elders, or only other journalists, or only bloggers are responsible for that. I think that we are all responsible for that. I guess in these past eight months in particular, when I’ve been more public – I’m exhausted, I’m obviously mentally exhausted, and I’ve put a lot of work into this – but it’s really strengthened my faith, I have to say. And been given an outlet. And been affirming. I am discerning person, and I can use these skills that actually were not appreciated in my church - maybe because I am a woman or because I ask too many questions. But I was just a pest who probably just seemed angry. But I could use some of these skills and come with my spiritual gifts, little though they may be, and put them toward advancing the Kingdom. That’s how I saw it. And I’m not going to say that God told me to go on Twitter – although I did get on Twitter on Reformation Day, October 31st 2018 – the same day that James MacDonald’s hot-mike was recording was actually going on. On that day! Isn’t that fascinating? [In the background, there were expressions of astonishment by Roys, Bryant, and Mahoney.] He’s plotting about how to defend himself, about the lawsuit with Christianity Today. And at the same time- you know, I’m not going to say it’s God- but I find that fascinating! People are like, ‘Just let God do it.’ God is doing it, and he is doing it through people. It’s not just magic. It’s not just Harry Potter. He’s doing it through us. We’re the body. So for me, even though I’m exhausted, I’ve received so much encouragement – and some hate too, for sure. But I feel like these two guys took the brunt of the hate. They paved the way for so many other people to finally speak out. Because for so long, no one would speak…”
***
One might get the impression from the audio that Jessica Hockett had never been on Twitter/X prior to October 31, 2018. But in fact, she had used Twitter/X under the handle “ja_hockett” as early as September 2016, as indicated by the co-author of her book on the subject of education of elementary school students.
Indeed, it is “fascinating” that Jessica Hockett would “get on Twitter” the same day that James MacDonald’s ‘hot mic’ recording took place. On the other hand, consider that if a Machiavellian Solution were coordinated between the Roys and MacDonald, it would have been straightforward to ensure the two events occurred on the same day. Jessica Hockett refers to October 31st as “Reformation Day,” and indeed it is the date on which Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses on the door of the All Saints’ Church in the year 1517. Of course, many calendars describe October 31st as “Halloween”.
***
In addition to “ex_harvest” and “ja_hockett”, Jessica Hockett has used Twitter/X handles of “JFHockett”, and “Ewoodhouse7”. Her current handle is “Wood_House76”. It is common for Jessica Hockett to present graphs of hard-to-acquire data related to admissions several hospitals, especially in New York during March and April 2020. Her access to that data, presumably through well-formulated FOIA requests or other means, has been a major factor in her growth in popularity, as indicated by followers. As mentioned above, she does not have any formal medical training. She generally avoids discussion of Covid during later time frames, such as summer and autumn of 2021.
Despite her lack of medical training or experience, she declared well-known and highly regarded Dr. Peter McCullough to be “wrong” in an 18 September 2023 post, she states:
“My specialty is spring 2020. I’ve studied the U.S outlier, which is also a global outlier, with some provinces in Italy. McCullough is wrong when says ‘the first wave was the illness.’ There is no evidence of sudden spread of a novel deadly/risk-additive coronavirus. He is a nice man, I’m sure. But that’s beside the point. What matters is the getting to the actual truth- not preserving egos or resisting intellectual debate with fellow anti-mandate champions because we’re grateful for their advocacy work.”
Jessica Hockett also posted on 3 May 2024:
“Spoiler: I am actually relatively alone in the so-called ‘dissident’ movement in remaining unconvinced that the COVID shot is an excess death driver.”
Although Jessica Hockett has seemingly demonstrated the required skill set to obtain data, she does not present data to support this particular stance.
Despite the Jessica Hockett above statement, Jessica Hockett characterized as the Covid vaccine as “unnecessary and unsafe” on 3 April 2024.
While Jessica Hockett has not been at all shy to criticize doctors, like Peter McCullough, and scientists for attributing at least some of the deaths in spring 2020, she has avoided publicly criticizing academic work associating her stated stance on the Covid vaccine with so-called “Christian nationalism”. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34629205/
For example, one paper [Corcoran et al. “Christian nationalism and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and uptake”] states:
“One of the strongest predictors of anti-vaccine attitudes in the U.S. is Christian nationalism-a U.S. cultural ideology that wants civic life to be permeated by their particular form of nationalist Christianity. [..]Using a new nationally representative sample of U.S. adults, we find that Christian nationalism is one of the strongest predictors of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and is negatively associated with having received or planning to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Since Christian nationalists make up approximately 20 percent of the population, these findings could have important implications for achieving herd immunity.”
Doesn’t her post describing the Covid vaccine as unnecessary and unsafe suggest that she agrees with this view attributed to so-called ‘Christian Nationalists’? Due to her close association with Julie Roys and lack of medical training, one might think Jessica Hockett would be more expert the area of social and spiritual issues than epidemiology. Why has Jessica Hockett avoided criticizing those who associate reluctance to get the shot with so-called ‘Christian Nationalism’ and instead focused her criticism on doctors, data analysts, and scientists who claim to have performed tests which confirm the existence of a novel virus, capable of causing death in some patients if left untreated?
In April 2021, Jessica Hockett had an exchange with Dr. Jamie Aten, who posted on Twitter/X post that he had to “file a police report in response to the increasing number of threats I’m getting for encouraging white evangelicals to get vaccinated against COVID-19.” Jessica Hockett replied by asking if they were “Threats or ‘death threats (or both)?” – adding that the headline ‘is different from’ the post.
The headline referenced by Jessica Hockett is in reference to a Julie Roys story about Dr. Aten’s remarks (See https://julieroys.com/wheaton-prof-death-threats-vaccines/ ). Dr. Aten was also quoted by the New York Times as saying:
“‘If we can’t get a significant number of white evangelicals to come around on this, the pandemic is going to last much longer than it needs to,’ said Jamie Aten, founder and executive director of the Humanitarian Disaster Institute at Wheaton College, an evangelical institution in Illinois.” Later in the New York Times article, Jamie Aten is cited as a source: “If white pastors encourage vaccination directly, said Dr. Aten, ‘there are people in the pews where you’ve just attacked their political party, and maybe their whole worldview.’”
I do not question whether Dr. Aten received threats, perhaps even death threats; however, given Pastor Caleb Campbell’s post regarding the commonality of the Machiavellian approach, it is possible that the phone calls were made in order to characterize those opposed to the vaccine as violent Christian nationalists? Has Jessica Hockett asked Jamie Aten to reconsider his advocacy of the Covid vaccines? Has Jessica Hockett asks either Jamie Aten or Julie Roys to reconsider associating opposition to the Covid vaccine so-called ‘Christian Nationalism’? Or would Roys or Aten presently classify Jessica Hockett as a ‘Christian Nationalist’ because of her stated view that the Covid vaccine is ‘unsafe and unnecessary’?
Perhaps coincidentally, Dr. Jamie Aten posted on Twitter/X “spent almost all of July (2021) in the hospital due to complications from my cancer surgery performed 8 years ago.” The details are private of course, but might some doctors might prefer to attribute some conditions, say perhaps as a circulatory problem, to an 8-year-old surgery rather than to consider another “inconvenient cause”? His lengthy hospital stay occurred only a few months after he advocated for the Covid vaccine.
***
Jessica Hockett has mentioned her sister on Twitter/X, who at the time of this writing can be found on Twitter/X by the name “Kelly Faber” and with the handle “klfaber1”. She describes herself as a pediatric hospitalist, and has worked with Christian Health Services Corps in the West African country of Togo. In addition to being a doctor, she has her own blog.
On 17 December 2020, a story appeared on Kelly Faber’s blog called “GO TO TOGO: The False Cross”. I would encourage a perusal through this short essay, available at the link below, and then proceed as I lay out some of my personal observations about the essay:
The first thing I noticed was the picture of the “Togo Sky”. Right away, it reminded me of The Wartburg Watch article with the transcript of James MacDonald and the reference to a comet. When I looked closely, I grew skeptical that the image was simply a photograph. By looking close to the right edge, about two-thirds of the way up, one can observe what appears to be a small number “6” in the picture.
This observation led me to think that the representation of the image, rather than being simply a picture taken of the Togo Night Sky, has been modified in some fashion.
The next observation I made was that the essay included a quote by C.S. Lewis: “The terrible thing, the almost impossible thing, is to hand over your whole self—all your wishes and precautions—to Christ.”
Recall that The Wartburg Watch story (posted by dee) also (1) used an image of a night sky, (2) quoted C.S. Lewis, and (3) referenced (sister of Kelly Faber) Jessica Hockett’s Twitter handle “ex_harvest” , so it seemed reasonable to me to think that the two articles might be related in some fashion, perhaps even written by the same person or group. Since the comet used in The Wartburg Watch article is a natural form of misdirection, and the number ‘6’ in the Togo Sky image looks artificial, it seemed logical for me to give the text a very close reading to search for a hidden meaning. In other words, is there a ‘language game’ akin to the – I would argue- hidden word “delation” on the Disarming Leviathan website.
Although I noticed a few misspellings, unexpected punctuation, and awkward phrases, what grasped my attention initially was the last paragraph, just below the CS Lewis quote.
This line stood out to me: “..as Christ reminds us, ‘It is finished’. We don’t need to add to the message of the cross or speak for Christ where he has not spoken.” First, it struck me as odd that a Christian would focus on the words from the Gospel of John, Chapter 19, verse 30. I interpret the word ‘it’ in the Book of John to refer to “death by the crucifixion”. Most Christians, I believe, would place more emphasis on the words Jesus spoke after the Resurrection. Second, an apparent mistake can be found in the second sentence with the phrase “…speak for Christ where he has not spoken.” In the Bible, pronouns for God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit are always capitalized. So the phrase should read “…speak for Christ where He has not spoken.” To leave the pronoun ‘he’ without capitalization could, of course, be an oversight.
Nonetheless, when in seeing these two items together – both with anti-Christian connotations, I wondered: Could the passage be conveying a hidden meaning that the author might be anti-Christian and viewed Christianity itself as being “finished”?
So I went back to the beginning of the passage and found several other “apparent mistakes”, which I will enumerate.
1. Let’s start with a rather subtle “mistake” in the sentence, “At the same time, Christ has given all believers the in-dwelling of the Holy Spirit meant to reveal His Word to us for every good work.” The capitalization is seemingly proper, and the spelling is correct, with one exception. The word “indwelling” should not be hyphenated. The unhyphenated word “indwelling” means “to exist as an energizing inner spirit, force, or principle”. Dictionaries commonly show prefixes with a hyphen or dash following, and definition of “in-“ used as a prefix means “not” . Consider, for example, “complete” versus “incomplete”, which have opposite meanings. If we take the combination of “in-“ and “dwelling” together as shown, “in-dwelling”, one might interpret the meaning as “not dwelling” or “not residing”.
It follows that the meaning of the sentence would entirely change: “At the same time, Christ has given all believers the ‘not dwelling’ of the Holy Spirit meant to reveal His Word to us for every good work.” The sentence is still a bit confusing, but it could be interpreted to mean that the Holy Spirit is not dwelling within us. Let us return to this sentence later because we can now use the same interpretation of “in-“ to resolve another “mistake”.
2. The sentence “Yesterday evening, a visiting nurse and I pulled chairs out into our guesthouse parking lot at 2am to watch the Gemanie meteor shower.” It is well known that the Geminid (rather than Gemanie) Meteor Shower occurs in December every year. It is clear that the “inid” has been replaced by “anie”. An interpretation of this change can be understood better if we first consult Prof. Sugrue’s lecture.
Prof. Sugrue: “In some respects, Machiavelli is similar to Plato in that both Plato and Machiavelli are trying to show us something buried deep in the marrow of the human soul. At the very center of it, Plato thinks there is an eternal goodness, a final spark of the Divine soul, which allows us to get some access to the mind of God and to the understanding of ultimate Truth and Wisdom. Machiavelli believes that at the core of the human soul, in the marrow of the psyche, there is a beast- an untamed animal which wants only the satisfaction of its desires. In some respects, this is a very prescient theory because it anticipates many of the views that will later be held by Sigmund Freud. Underneath our superego, underneath this veil of civility, this veneer of righteousness, in fact we are we are animals, exclusively concerned with the satisfaction of our physical desires. We are beasts with a very, very thin shell of rational morality. [..]
The centered, focused, fierce desire to satisfy your innermost longings [is Machiavellian]. In some respects, Machiavelli is what people would be like in the Freudian sense if you took away the superego altogether, or if you only kept the kept the superego – the conception of righteousness, of moral virtue - as a veneer to protect you from other people’s condemnation.”
Consider how Sigmund Freud approaches psychoanalytic theory and the words which are used (see, for example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Id,_ego_and_superego):
“The id, ego and superego are three distinct, interacting agents in the psychic apparatus, defined in Sigmund Freud's structural model of the psyche. The three agents are theoretical constructs that Freud employed to describe the basic structure of mental life as it was encountered in psychoanalytic practice. Freud himself used the German terms das Es, Ich, and Über-Ich, which literally translate as "the it", "I", and "over-I". The Latin terms id, ego and superego were chosen by his original translators and have remained in use.
In the ego psychology model of the psyche, the id is the set of uncoordinated instinctual desires; the superego plays the critical and moralizing role; and the ego is the organized, realistic agent that mediates between the instinctual desires of the id and the critical superego; Freud compared the ego (in its relation to the id) to a man on horseback: the rider must harness and direct the superior energy of his mount, and at times allow for a practicable satisfaction of its urges. The ego is thus "in the habit of transforming the id's will into action, as if it were its own."
So for the correctly spelled “Geminid”, the “inid” has been removed. If we once again take the prefix “in-“ to mean “not” the “not id” can be interpreted as meaning the “superego”, which is what we might call a “conscience”. The German word, “nie” translates to “never”. If we take the leftover “a” to simply be a connecting syllable, we might interpret the replacement of “conscience” with “never”.
Once again, we are left with an interpretation of a sentence with a “misspelling” in the “GO TO TOGO” essay which is the opposite of Christian values.
3. As I read through this same paragraph, I had to look up how to spell some names of stars and constellations. For example, I could see how one might make a mistake in spelling “Cassiopeia”, but in fact this is the correct spelling. That is one reason it surprised me that where one would expect the word “stars”, this passage instead uses the word “starts”, as follows: “As I began to read aloud, ‘one of four starts that makes up the Asterism known as the False Cross. This is often mistaken for the Southern Cross causing errors in astronavigation.’” Of course, this is the kind of mistake which eludes spell-check software, so we might tend to overlook it.
In the same sentence, is the word “Asterism”. One definition of “asterism” which might, at first, seem to make the most sense is “constellation”. However, the “A” in the word “Asterism” is capitalized and it should not be. Since its context is not that of a proper noun in the sentence, the ‘a’ should be lower case. Interestingly, another definition of “asterism” is “three asterisks in triangular form used to call attention to a following passage”. In the context of a mathematical proof, the “asterism” symbol with dots in place of asterisks to denote the equivalent of the word, “therefore”. The proof statement generally follows.
A wikipedia entry ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therefore_sign )referencing Mackey, Albert Gallatin (1925). An Encyclopedia of freemasonry and its kindred sciences, comprising the whole range of arts, sciences and literature as connected with the institution (reprint ed.). Masonic History Co. p. 2.) showed a different meaning and provided an example.
The “asterism” is used as a “substitute for the dot of abbreviation” and provides an example. Since a dot of abbreviation is itself is a substitute for a series of letters (e.g., “Mister” becomes “Mr.” with the dot abbreviation substituted for “iste”), one might use this definition and describe an “asterism” as either a “substitute” or a “substitute for a substitute”.
A website devoted to Freemason symbols provides some quite illuminating examples.
http://web.archive.org/web/20240301044858/https://freemasonscommunity.life/three-dots-in-a-triangle/
This site first describes the symbol as such, “The symbol of three dots arranged in a triangular formation [..] is not just symbolic but also functional, guiding the reader through a reasoned argument to an inevitable end.”
Interestingly, the example they show for logical arguments is:
* All men are mortal. (Premise 1)
* Socrates is a man. (Premise 2)
* Socrates is mortal. (Conclusion)
The image include the “therefore sign” to indicate the conclusion regarding Socrates is proven. How very interesting it is that the example chosen regards an individual, Socrates, whose philosophy involves the metaphysics- the “World of the Forms”. Do you think a Machiavellian actor might think about Jesus in place of Socrates when reading, or perhaps writing, those very same lines?
There is one circumstance in which it would be appropriate to capitalize the word “Asterism” in the sentence:
“As I began to read aloud, ‘one of four starts that makes up the Asterism known as the False Cross.”
If we were to assume that “Asterism is a “substitute” for a spiritual being, it would make sense to capitalize the letter ‘A’. Then, “the Asterism known as the False Cross” might be taken to mean “Anti-Christ” or perhaps “Satan”.
Now we can go back and consider the word “starts” in place of “stars” in this sentence with “Anti-Christ” in place of “Asterism”:
“As I began to read aloud, ‘one of four starts that makes up the Anti-Christ known as the False Cross. This is often mistaken for the Southern Cross causing errors in astronavigation.’”
If the reader is familiar with the Book of Revelation, Chapter 6, it is easy to see that the four “starts” might refer to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, which this result of Jesus (the Lamb) opening the four of the seven seals.
Consider the discussion of the White Horse described in ( https://www.beliefnet.com/faiths/christianity/symbolism-of-the-white-horse-in-revelation.aspx )
“To understand the symbolism of the white horse in Revelation, we need to understand the meaning of Revelation 6:2. [..] The identity of this rider has been a great source of debate. Some believe that the rider is Christ. This could make sense because He rides a white horse and wears a crown. Yet, the surrounding context removes this possibility. Let’s look again at the rider of the white horse. We know from scripture that he conquers the earth. We know that he is a great dictator and a great deceiver. The rider on the white horse is typically associated with the Anti-Christ.”
While there are many possible interpretations of the Biblical scripture, the above is a commonly-held view. And if one applies it to Togo Starry Nights essay, the sentence “As I began to read aloud, ‘one (rider of the White Horse) of four starts (Four Horsemen) that makes up the Asterism (Anti-Christ) known as the False Cross. This is often mistaken for the Southern Cross (real cross/Jesus/Christianity) causing errors in astronavigation.’” makes sense.
Once the “substitute” is understood to be have the hidden meaning, some of the other capitalized spiritual references, such as “Lord”, might be seen to represent “Anti-Christ” rather than “Jesus Christ”.
Let’s try out this possibility with this passage:
“But the Lord brought them through a situation that made it abundantly clear that they lacked the knowledge or wisdom to respond well. Maybe the Lord brought someone alongside to teach them. Maybe life itself was crushing and they began to understand the Lord’s deliverance in a whole new way.”
Now substitute “Anti-Christ” for “Lord”:
“But the Anti-Christ brought them through a situation that made it abundantly clear that they lacked the knowledge or wisdom to respond well. Maybe the Anti-Christ brought someone alongside to teach them. Maybe life itself was crushing and they began to understand the Anti-Christ’s deliverance in a whole new way.”
One point of emphasis is that a pure Machiavellian does not believe in Satan any more than he believes in God. So the idea that an Asterism is a “substitute for a substitute” might allude to a real person or agency as the substitute for of Satan, which one might imagine as the initial substitute for Jesus. For sake of argument, instead of “Satan” we might place “Jeffrey Epstein” in place of “the Lord” and “His” in this sentence:
“What if the Lord appointed both Trump and Biden in their respective times to bring about His plan for our country, whatever that may be?”
Then we get:
“What if the Jeffrey Epstein appointed both Trump and Biden in their respective times to bring about Jeffrey Epstein’s plan for our country, whatever that may be?”
This outcome avoids metaphysics and might be closer to the true version of what the author is cryptically conveying. Personally, I find this second interpretation, with an actual person or agency referenced, less intimidating than one that involves a metaphysical Satan. So the author might prefer to have readers interpret the Asterism to be Satan both because it is easier to frighten people and because it is simpler to dismiss the notion as a “conspiracy theory”. Naturally, one could pick a favorite villainous “man behind the curtain (from the Wizard of Oz)” and try out different sentences throughout the essay.
With Machiavellian behavior, it is not unusual to have layer upon layer of deception, so it is important to avoid being drawn into just one single line of thinking.
4. There are several other apparent misspellings and unusual punctuation which diligent readers may track down and interpret, but I wish to focus on only one more passage.
Consider:
“We are hopefully moving closer to Christ with each season that passes as He walks us through the valleys and mountain tops of life. We are becoming no Church at all if we look at others on the road behind us and think ‘they probably don’t follow Jesus at all.’ Or rather, if we look at those ahead of us and think, ‘maybe I am not a follower of Jesus since I don’t seem to be as far along as him/her.’”
In this passage, substitute “persecuted Christian” for “Christ” (given point #1), and for sake of argument, let’s use “Anti-Christ” in place of “He”. The first sentence becomes: “We are hopefully moving closer to (being) a persecuted Christian with each season that passes as (the) Anti-Christ walks us through the valleys and mountain tops of life.” I would argue that this sentence as posed makes logical sense.
Now look at the second sentence:
“We are becoming no Church at all if we look at others on the road behind us and think ‘they probably don’t follow Jesus at all.’”
Is this how some Harvest Bible Church members might have felt about James MacDonald after his ‘hot mic’ and other scandalous actions took place? Harkening back to the article describing James MacDonald early experiences, did you happen to notice the use of the word “planter” to describing James MacDonald? Might the story be surreptitiously signaling that James MacDonald was a plant, rather than a planter?
Now regard the third sentence:
“Or rather, if we look at those ahead of us and think, ‘maybe I am not a follower of Jesus since I don’t seem to be as far along as him/her.’”
Is this how some Harvest Bible Church members might have felt about Julie Roys? Might the use of “him/her” at the end of the sentence refer to supporters of the so-called “trans rights” movement?
By taking all three sentences together, my reading of the passage supports the idea that James MacDonald and Julie Roys were part of a Machiavellian Solution with a controlled dual narrative. One goal of the enterprise is to tear apart one Church – specifically Harvest Bible Church. By extension, and through national media, I would posit that the over-arching goal of those who organized the dual narrative is to destroy not just one single church, but Christianity itself. I believe this is the desire of what The Ethical Skeptic called the “Fourth Party”.
Return to what the filmmaker Uljaki said in reference to “Christian nationalists”:
“I discovered all of this plotting, all of these deals, and the fact that those behind them were anti-democratic from the beginning. (‘Christian nationalism’s’ goal is) pure fascism. It’s pure power. They have been wanting and plotting the same thing for 40-plus years. They were incredibly adept at concealing what their motives were. You had to decode what they were saying. When they were talking about re-creating the kingdom of God on Earth, if you thought they were talking about something theological and spiritual, you would be mistaken. They were talking about replacing democracy with theocracy. [..] If you look around you at the divisiveness and the distrust of institutions that exist today in this country, you will realize how incredibly successful they have been in executing their plan. It’s been like a slow-motion revolution in a way, happening bit by bit all over the place.”
It seems to me that Mr. Uljaki was indeed revealing a plan - but not any sort of plan that has to do with true Christians.
5.My final point takes into account the title.
Prof. Sugrue: “In some respects, Machiavelli’s project is like that of Friedrich Nietzsche. It will be a revaluation of all values. He’s going to stand the Christian and Platonic view of righteousness, of political morality, on its head. All the things we previously thought were ‘good’ turn out to be ‘evil’. All the things we thought were ‘evil’ turn out to be ‘good’ – or if not ‘good’- then ‘pleasurable’, ‘practical’, ‘useful’.”
Consider again at the title “GO TO TOGO”. Is not “GO TO” a reversal of “TOGO”? Is it possible that Kelly Faber is implying a similar “inversion of good and evil” in her posted essay? Is it possible that her sister, Jessica Hockett, is also playing a significant role in Machiavellian Solution with respect to Christianity? Is she playing a role within a Machiavellian Solution with respect to the response to Covid-19?”
***
One reason for using the ambiguous term “author” in place of Kelly Faber’s name in the description above is that another essay titled “Contemplation Under Togo Starry Nights” was published with a stated date of (October 23, 2023) under a website under the name of Sarah Pruitt. The essay begins with the same first six paragraphs, which include the same substitutions implying a hidden meaning (“Geminae” for “Geminid”, “starts” for “stars”, “Asterism” for “asterism”).
But then the essay posted under Sarah Pruitt’s name departs from the version under the name Kelly Faber.
For the most part, the rest of the essay, comprising four paragraphs, offers advice. The section is given here:
“In medicine we say the most dangerous situation is when we don’t know what we don’t know –when we aren’t aware there is knowledge missing, and we feel as though we are aren’t aware there is knowledge we are missing; when we can’t even imagine there is information we are missing, and we feel as though we are already adequately informed. But when we know we have deficiencies, we can go find answers when we don’t have them or surround ourselves with people who have different expertise than us. That’s called wisdom.
I am all too familiar with the difficulties medical missionaries face in having to make decision we weren’t trained to make. We carry the mistakes we’ve made with us like a heavy vest that never comes off. We can all tell stories of moral injuries that culminate from the agonizing decisions we make when resources are low-resources and acuity is high. It’s only on the other side of those things that we can look back and teach others to avoid the mistakes we made.
As medical missionaries we take our message seriously. We’ve left our families, our homes, to follow a call of Christ to reach every tribe, tongue and nation with the Gospel. We pledge our time, our lives to share the Good News, to dispel “False Crosses” of the world and point them to the ONE who saves. A mature believer can look back and label things they believe about God, that they didn’t know before. They didn’t necessarily seek out the knowledge, because they didn’t know it was even missing! But the Lord brought them through a situation that made it abundantly clear that they lacked the knowledge or wisdom to respond well. Maybe the Lord brought someone alongside to teach them. Maybe life itself was crushing and they began to understand the Lord’s deliverance in a whole new way.
Iron 2 Silver wants to help stand in the gap that exists in medical missions between what we are expected to do, and what we were trained to do. We want to facilitate conversations, not only between our team and yours, but between medical mission fields, in order to learn from one another and push towards the best possible care in the countries we serve. We hope we will continue to learn things from one another and force the conversation, “Are we doing what is best?” We want to normalize the idea that we might not be doing what is best, and be willing to admit mistakes so that we can share best practices across fields and specialties. As medical missionaries we often need to lay down the false cross of, ‘I can do it all’. [..] May the Lord bless your work as you work unto the Lord in all you do.”
The section is nearly free of apparent mistakes, but the grammatical use of the singular “is” in the phrase “when resources are low-resources and acuity is high” requires that the type (rather than the amount) of “resources” can be characterized as “low-resources”. If we think about the prefix “low-“ and relate it to a words like “lowdown” or “lowlife”, does “low-resources” imply “resources which are evil”?
Also, while the blog is listed under just one name, Sarah Pruitt, the last paragraph uses the pronoun “we” extensively.
The problem with the advice is: Precisely how would the author have confidence that she actually does have the knowledge she suggests?
Professor Sugrue: “Machiavelli is not a team player. If you were a ruler, you would never in your right mind have him work for you. Suppose a ruler is foolish enough to bring a Machiavellian in. The Machiavellian kills him, makes it look like someone else did it, and he takes over the throne. A person would also have to be crazy to work for Machiavelli. In other words, suppose he were to become the prince or the king. What is he going to do with you when you become his number two or number three or number four man? You are expendable. Everyone is expendable to the Machiavellian. You have no intrinsic value except as a vehicle by which he can satisfy his desires, by which he can gratify his lust for power. So the Machiavellian soul is the tyrannical soul.”
That leads to a dilemma for Machiavellian actors. The version of the Togo Starry Nights essay posted under the name Sarah Pruitt gives sound advice is stating:
“(T)he most dangerous situation is when we don’t know what we don’t know- when there is knowledge we are missing; when we can’t even imagine there is information we are missing, and we feel as though we are already adequately informed. But when we know we have deficiencies, we can go find answers when we don’t have them or surround ourselves with people who have different expertise than us.”
The trouble with someone wrapped up in a Machiavellian Solution is that you would have to trust the answers you receive are true. Suppose you had a set of ten questions. If you were to pose them to an actor within a Machiavellian scheme, you might receive ten answers that sound very logical. Perhaps, nine of the ten answers would be completely and provably true. But who among us would be surprised if the tenth answer were a complete lie, and odds are that tenth question is the one that matters most of all. Why, in that instance, you might just be better off had you not received any answers whatsoever, including the nine that were correct, because those correct answers might lead you to believe the most ‘dangerous’ lie.
When the last paragraph of the post same reads, “(W)e often need to lay down the false cross of, ‘I can do it all’”, it could easily apply to every single individual participant in a Machiavellian scheme. To wit:
Prof. Sugrue: “This Machiavellian political philosophy, like that of Gorgias, tends to make people non-social animals. And regrettably, despite all our failings, we are social animals, like it or not.”
Through October 2022, the name of the author of the aforementioned piece was listed as Sarah Cates. Sometime more recently, presumably, her name was changed to Sarah Pruitt.
https://web.archive.org/web/20221002001418/https://www.healthservicecorps.org/staff/sarah-cates/
And sometime in early 2023, the Health Service Corps staff website listing associated with Kelly Faber now lists her name as Kelly Frazier.
Kelly Frazier:
https://archive.is/2024.06.06-105735/https://www.healthservicecorps.org/staff/kelly-faber/
The image on the left shows Sarah Cates with Kelly Faber in an interview from a few years ago. The more recent podcast productions refer to Sarah Pruitt and Kelly Frazier.
Of course, name changes are common occurrences for many reasons, including marriage and divorce. It is just something I noticed and felt should be mentioned.
***
The description “Iron 2 Silver” happens to involve two metals found in Plato’s Republic in the myth of the metals. The other two metals, gold and bronze, are used in a Christian Health Services Corps website (https://www.healthservicecorps.org/i2s ) which alludes to the Book of Isaiah, Ch. 60, which the same four metals.
In Plato’s Republic, the Gold represents the ruling class, Silver represents auxiliaries or guards who protect the ruling class, while Bronze and Iron are described as physical laborers.
(See, for example, https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Plato-s-Republic-The-Myth-Of-P3FPHB5Z9JXQ )
Through the Christian Health Services Corps website, Iron 2 Silver website claims to have coined the phrase “the Silver Standard” pointing out that “Western-defined ‘gold standards’ are often not attainable or appropriate in low-resource settings.” It seems the Christian Health Services Corps might be explaining why the name is not Iron 2 Gold with this combination of statements. By the way, take note that the term, “low-resource”, is used in this description.
It turns out that a language game can be employed with the name “Iron 2 Silver” with an astonishing outcome, which perhaps demystifies one of the most ludicrous psychological operations ever set forth.
Iron and silver are sometimes pose a challenge to chemistry students using the Periodic Table since the symbol for Iron is Fe while that for silver is Ag. Both refer to Latin terminology. In compounds, iron comes in two common types. Roman numerals are used to designate the number valence electrons. Iron (II) is called as “ferrous” while Iron (III) is denoted “ferric”. “Iron 2” might logically be called “ferrous”. The Ag symbol for silver comes from it Latin designation-“ Argentum”. So, combining the two words would be “Ferrous Argentum”.
It turns out that a Latin near-homonym can be formed from this combination: Fera Saur-gentem.
https://www.wordsense.eu/gentem/
The Latin word, Fera, can be translated as “Savage”. The prefix saur- means Lizard, and the Latin word Gentem can be translated as either a “Roman Clan”, people, or as the chief gods.
If you combine those, the result for Fera Saur-Gentem in English is “Savage Lizard Roman clan” or “Savage lizard gods”, or “Savage Lizard people”.
In what seems a remarkable coincidence, this end result of this very simple language game carried out in Latin describes what Vox called “the greatest political conspiracy ever created” in an article titled “Lizard people: the greatest political conspiracy ever created” from 2014, which for some reason seems to have omitted the word ‘theory’ from the usual term ‘conspiracy theory’ in its the title. Go figure.
“The idea of shape-shifting lizards taking human forms in a plot to rule America and the world has become one of the most majestic and marvelous conspiracy theories created by mankind (or lizardkind, if you will). In 2008, ‘lizard people’ found its way onto the Minnesota's midterm ballot with some controversy.”
Time Magazine published a piece titled “The Reptilian Elite” ( https://web.archive.org/web/20150103125457/http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1860871_1860876_1861029,00.html ) which adds:
“They are among us. Blood-drinking, flesh-eating, shape-shifting extraterrestrial reptilian humanoids with only one objective in their cold-blooded little heads: to enslave the human race. They are our leaders, our corporate executives, our beloved Oscar-winning actors and Grammy-winning singers, and they're responsible for the Holocaust, the Oklahoma City bombings and the 9/11 attacks ... at least according to former BBC sports reporter David Icke, who became the poster human for the theory in 1998 after publishing his first book, The Biggest Secret, which contained interviews with two Brits who claimed members of the royal family are nothing more than reptiles with crowns. (Picture Dracula meets Swamp Thing).
The conspiracy theorist and New Age philosopher, who wore only turquoise for a time and insisted on being called Son of God-Head, says these ‘Annunaki’ (the reptiles) have controlled humankind since ancient times; they count among their number Queen Elizabeth, George W. Bush, Henry Kissinger, Bill and Hillary Clinton and Bob Hope. Encroaching on other conspiracy theorists' territory, Icke even claims that the lizards are behind secret societies like the Freemasons and the Illuminati. Since earning the dubious title of ‘paranoid of the decade’ in the late 1990s, Icke has written several books on the topic, including his latest work, The David Icke Guide to the Global Conspiracy, while operating his own website — complete with merchandise and advertisements.”
***
Now, I would like to make two points. First, I had heard of the phrase “Lizard people” prior to writing this article, but never felt it was worth my time to ever investigate because the very idea of some combination of a lizard and a human being is not only illogical, but preposterous. On the other hand, as a ‘language game’, it may make sense to promote for the very same reason. In other words, it is conceivable that the phrase “Lizard People” might truly have a hidden meaning because a select group who understand its roots would be able to talk about it openly with virtually no concern about being discovered. I believe I have offered enough proof to justify that this possible decoding warrants serious consideration.
Second, I am compelled to defend lizards, which are quite benign and peaceful creatures. They mainly eat bugs and leaves, and even make good pets for children. Films which somehow combine lizards with human form, as in The Creature from the Black Lagoon, come across as humorous or absurd rather than frightening. So to me, it seems slanderous to group lizards in with Machiavellian concepts of the Illuminati and Freemasons. The concept of enslaving human beings- taking away our rights to speak freely, to worship according to our conscience, to defend our families and property, and generally to pursue happiness- should, in my opinion, never be associated with an actual lizard.
The word “Savage”, or its Latin equivalent “Fera”, also seems an unsuitable description for a lizard. Yet, there is a company called Fera Science which prominently pictures a lizard-seemingly flying through the air like a kung fu fighter, alongside a picture of sheep, on its website when describing its values.
https://web.archive.org/web/20240614234142/https://www.fera.co.uk/about-us/who-we-are
“(Fera Science) helps to address some of today’s biggest challenges, including coping with the impact of global population growth and the need to make efficient sustainable use of natural resources. [..] Original thinking develops new products and services, making our customers and us successful. [..] Our research collaborators protect and support the environment addressing global challenges.”
The “impact of global population growth” has been a topic of interest to the “elites” for decades. It would not surprise me if those individuals were to describe themselves as “gentem” since it includes ‘the chief gods’ as one definition, which I suspect would be their preferred option.
The picture of sheep is also an interesting choice. Sheep are sometimes described as “mutton”. In Shakespeare’s comedy Measure for Measure, his devilish character Lucio used the term “mutton” as a slang term meaning “prostitutes”.
One topic Fera Science investigates is related to ‘alternative protein’ development.
“Convincing consumers to embrace alternative proteins can be challenging. Overcoming taste, texture, and perception barriers associated with traditional meat is crucial for market acceptance. [..] In a world where global meat consumption is on the rise and the challenges of sustainability, environmental impact, and supply chain concerns are ever-present, the development of alternative proteins becomes a crucial endeavour. Alternative proteins, including plant-based substitutes, insect protein, and cultivated meats, offer a sustainable pathway forward.”
Fera Science promotes a study authored by Rosario Romero and Christopher Bryant. The study is devoted to the discussion of the importance of naming “alternative protein” products. For example, it includes the statement, “(T)here is no evidence that consumers are confused or misled by terms like ‘vegetarian burgers’ or ‘oat milk’.” The debate centers around the idea is that a food including the word ‘burger’ or the word ‘milk’ might be conflated with milk or burger used in its traditional sense.
Interestingly, the second author, Christopher Bryant, also co-authored a paper published in the journal “Appetite” in 2019 with a very similar title (“What's in a name? Consumer perceptions of in vitro meat under different names”) and content, but with a different co-author (Julie C. Barnett in place of Rosario Romero).
https://purehost.bath.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/190156720/What_s_In_a_Name_Edited2.pdf
Interestingly, Christopher Bryant’s name in the pdf article is spelled “Chris”, but the name referenced on the Fera Science website is spelled “Christ”. Certainly, one might contend that either spelling could be shorthand for his full name, which is “Christopher”, according to the second source.
Misspelled words catch my attention, and the spelling “Christ” as opposed to “Chris” caused me to reflect. I stumbled upon an idea. Now I must emphasize that this idea is completely fictional and hypothetical; any resemblance to any practices at Fera Science would be purely coincidental and unexpected. Communion service, a well-known and common worldwide practice among Christians, has its basis on the scripture. For example, the Book of Matthew, chapter 26, verses 26-29 states (from the New American Standard) “And while they were eating, Jesus took some bread, and after a blessing, He broke it and gave it to His disciples, and said, ‘Take, eat; this is My body.’ And when He had taken a cup and given thanks, He gave it to them saying, ‘Drink from it, all of you; for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins.’”
Of course, no Christian would ever literally consume the body or blood of Christ, or from any other person for that matter. Rather, the body and blood of Christ are symbolically present in the bread and wine, and this is obviously known to anyone. Christians consider it virtuous to worship by taking Communion as they reflect on the words written in the scripture.
Suppose that a hypothetical company in the “alternative protein” production business were operated by a bad actor. For sake of argument, let’s just say that someone like Jeffrey Epstein owns and controls this company. It is conceivable that an evil company could implement a business model which is an inversion of the practice of Communion in the Christian faith, as follows. What if the protein source of an “alternative protein” provider is… shall we say… not exactly the “alternative” normal people might expect? What if this (fictional) hypothetical company used as a source for its “alternative protein” source the flesh and blood of murdered Christians? Please do not judge me harshly for conjuring such a nauseating possibility. It is scientifically possible, after all, since human beings are animals. Conceivably, it might even be more economical to implement than growing meat in a laboratory, and that alone might justify the idea for some of the more evil elements in the world.
One might contend, with some logic, that regulatory agencies are in place to ensure that people know what is in their food supply, and surely no one would accept the repulsive idea of eating a processed human being. Ah, but what if the leaders of these regulatory agencies are controlled by Jeffrey Epstein through bribes or blackmail? Unfortunately, we need to face the reality that, for example, the Food and Drug Administration in the United States has yet to tell people that Ivermectin is a safe drug to take for treatment of Covid-19. It only removed its obnoxious at best and murderous at worst ‘You are not a horse’ tweet after a successful lawsuit. It seems obvious to me that the FDA is controlled, and I think most of us know it.
Would Jeffrey Epstein balk at the business of processing human beings into ‘alternative protein products’, paying off the authorities to turn a blind eye, and reaping billions of dollars in profit from it?
Now consider the following report from
https://www.christianpost.com/news/over-8000-christians-killed-in-nigeria-in-2023-watchdog.html
“Over 8,000 Christians were reportedly killed in Nigeria in 2023 amid a rise in attacks, abductions and killings in recent years, according to estimates included in a report released this week by a civil society organization.”
So let’s assume that a hypothetical business operated by someone like Jeffrey Epstein, or worse, were to produce “alternative proteins” by murdering Christians and then surreptitiously process and add them to products without the awareness of the consumer. Many of those consumers, being under the impression that they had avoided actual meat derived from animals, would feel they were being kind-hearted. Unknowingly, however, they would have devoured the flesh and blood of murdered Christians. In other words, a consumer would feel virtuous because of the belief that an artificially-derived substance is within a product where actual human flesh and blood is present instead. So the consumer, under the impression that an artificially-derived substance to be present in the food product, would feel virtuous while eating the product which consists of actual human flesh, though unknown to the consumer.
A Machiavellian actor might relish the implementation of such an inversion of Christianity. Some who subscribes to Nietzsche views might even contend it is a form of art.
***
Often, the reports of these attacks on Christians in West Africa are said to be carried out by “Islamic extremists” or “Islamic terrorist groups”, but I have difficulty reconciling the name with my own personal experience. A former colleague who is a practicing Muslim explained to me that the Koran taught the practice of fasting during Ramadan in order to build empathy, with the expected outcome being that a person of Muslim faith would extend kindness and charity to those who are poor and hungry. When he explained this to me, as a Christian, I viewed it as a practice which Jesus might find appealing.
Followers of the philosophy of Nietzsche denigrate all religions and their practitioners- no matter whether Buddhist, Jewish, Hindu, Islamic, Voodoo - anything which involves metaphysics. But for both Nietzsche proponents and pure Machiavellian actors, there can be no doubt that Christianity is the primary target because of its monumental influence on the development of Western Culture.
Could it be that Christians in Sub-Saharan Africa are being targeted in the same fashion in which Jews were targeted during Adolf Hitler’s Third Reich? What if there are present-day Machiavellian actors who wish to take this evil process even a step farther? Could it be that those who consider themselves to fit within the “Gold” Tier of the Socratic Myth of the Metals have formulated what Nietzsche might frame as a work of art which allows them to assert dominancy over other classes of society, including the “Silver” auxiliary class? Consider that the “Silver” class includes not only military personnel, who offer physical protection, but also those, like celebrities, social and or traditional media personalities, and political allies, who can offer ideological protection by serving as proponents of a product or technology.
Recently, the Pentagon has sought spent roughly a half-billion dollars to develop “lab-grown meat” to “reduce the Pentagon’s carbon footprint, a priority for the American military as it pursues a Biden administration-mandate to address climate change and other cultural issues.”
Many individuals in the so-called “Global Elite” (Ruling “Gold class”) express concerns about overpopulation, similar to those espoused on the Fera Science website. Might some of them in what they might delight in causing the remains of individuals they may view as being in the “Iron” (peasant-class) Christians of sub-Saharan Africa to be processed and subsequently unknowingly eaten by the “Silver” (auxiliary-class) of the rank-and-file US military members?
Followers of Nietzsche view art as the highest form of expression, and it would offer the “Global Elite” the opportunity to mock US Military members by secretly mandating cannibalism under the guise of a false virtue. Consider that the bodies of those whom the elites might classify as being in the “Iron” class would be converted to a food supply for the “Silver” class. Might such a process be described as “Iron 2 Silver”?
What’s in a name? Perhaps for “Iron 2 Silver”, the answer is ‘Savage Lizard People’.
***
To conclude, we live in a time when much of the information reported in the media strikes us strange, illogical, and disturbing. The temptation is to use modern technology, such as artificial intelligence tools, to increase our level of understanding. But there are many occasions when it can be much more instructive to consider the examples of the philosophy of historical figures to learn patterns. Here, I have explored some of these oddities by seeking out hidden meaning through Heidegger-style “language games” and word play for several examples, which I suspected might be present because, in my opinion, the attitudes of the authors resemble those of Machiavelli, who was quite brash in signaling his intentions or in mocking his unknowing victims. Both those who worship in Christian churches and people who want to regain medical freedom have been subjected to this mistreatment - sometimes by the same chaos agents.
For the reason why individuals might construct strange and highly sophisticated “language games”, consider that Nietzsche viewed art, rather than religion or philosophy, as the highest form of existence. The language games can be interpreted as a form of art, and the clues have generally remained hidden because it is seemingly counterintuitive for a rational person to consider looking for them.
The results speak for themselves.
***
Epilogue:
First, I would like to directly address those who chose a Machiavellian path and are caught up in this complicated labyrinth, which has either already left you miserable or certainly will sometime soon.
James Joyce references a Roman law in his 1916 novel, ‘A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man’, when his priest character preaches:
“In olden times it was the custom to punish the parricide, the man who had raised his murderous hand against his father, by casting him into the depths of the sea in a sack in which were placed a cock, a monkey, and a serpent. The intention of those lawgivers who framed such a law, which seems cruel to us now, was to punish the criminal by the company of hateful and hurtful beasts. But what is the fury of those dumb beasts compared to the fury of throats of the damned in hell….”
Might not the analogy penned by Joyce also apply to those who participate in a Machiavellian scheme and wait too long, as it collapses as the truth becomes apparent? It’s only going to get worse.
Nobody want to own up to mistakes, but in this instance, confession is the only way out.
The parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11-31) offers what is likely the best example, but there are many other examples too from great works of literature if that is your preference.
For example, Oscar Wilde addressed the topic in The Picture of Dorian Gray. After many years of evil and decadent behavior, the title character contemplated:
“Confess? [..] Even if he did confess, no one would believe him. [..] Yet it was his duty to confess, to suffer public shame, and to make atonement. There was a God who called upon man to tell their sins to earth as well as to heaven. Nothing that he could do would cleanse him until he had told his own sin.”
But instead of confessing, the Dorian Gray character attempted to kill his own conscience, and that led to his demise. I believe Wilde’s intended lesson is that the conscience is inseparable from the human soul. Instead of going down such a path, seek redemption. Do not fear telling the truth. One reason I have composed this article is assure you that you will be believed- if indeed your confession is true and complete.
A confession need not be simultaneously coupled with a metaphysical transformation. Did you know that Dostoevsky’s Raskolnikov character, in his magnificent novel Crime and Punishment, did not convert to Christianity at the time he confessed to being a murderer? Rather, his turn to Christianity came long after he had been sent to Siberia, as described in the epilogue. The lesson is that the first step, a necessary one, is to unburden one’s conscience. Salvation may- or may not- come later.
***
In the second part of this epilogue, I contend that while Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is justly honored for his achievements as the leader of the Civil Rights movement in the United States, he is underappreciated as a philosopher.
The Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute of Stanford University holds a library of sermons and speeches written by Dr. King, which thankfully is accessible to the general public. I always seem to find just the right words form Dr. King’s speeches and sermons to include in The Way Out articles. In February 1956 Dr. King delivered a sermon in Montgomery, Alabama titled, “It’s Hard to Be a Christian”. While the sermon itself is not written in full, Dr. King’s handwritten outline was transcribed.
As discussed in the aforementioned source
( https://kinginstitute.stanford.edu/king-papers/documents/its-hard-be-christian ) the sermon is remarkable in part because Dr. King delivered it only days after his home was attacked:
“On 30 January 1956 the Montgomery Improvement Association (MIA) filed a federal suit challenging the segregation of Montgomery buses. Later that evening, while King addressed a crowd of two thousand at a mass meeting at First Baptist Church, his home was bombed. He rushed home to find his wife, Coretta, and their daughter, Yolanda, unharmed. King then urged the crowd gathered outside his home to remain nonviolent. For more on this, see Joe Azbell, ‘Blast Rocks Residence of Bus Boycott Leader,’ 31 January 1956, in Papers 3:114-115. Dexter's program from 2 February 1956 indicates King preached ‘It's Hard to Be a Christian.’”
Consider how the constructed arguments laid out by Dr. King are precisely opposite those of Machiavelli or Nietzsche. Even in a brief outline form, I find the alternative he lays out to be compelling.
“He refers to the story of the Good Samaritan, noting: ‘The question of the Samaritan was: What will happen to this man if I don't stop to help him. Ultimately the thing that determines whether a man is a Christian is how he answers this question.’ King concludes: ‘Taking up the cross is the voluntary or deliberate choice of putting ourselves without reservation at the service of Christ and his kingdom; it is putting our whole being in the struggle against evil, whatever the cost.’” [Dr. King cites Matthew 16:24 in his notes: “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.” ]
· “One of the most prevalent illusions of modern life is the belief that it is easy to be a Christian. In so many quarters Christianity has been relegated to a bundle of sentimental teachings.”[Dr. King cites Norman Vincent Peale as an example and calls the approach a glorified aspirin tablet – an opiate of the people.]
· “We have substituted a cushion for a cross. We have substituted the soothing lemonade of escape for the bitter cup of reality. We have a high blood pressure of creeds and an anemia of deeds.”[..]
· “Jesus never left men with such illusions. He made it crystal clear that his gospel was difficult. It demands that we subordinate our clamoring egos to the pressing concerns of God's Kingdom. This is the meaning of self-denial. There is nothing vague and ambiguous about the word “deny”. It is appallingly sharp and clear. It means what it says. It is saying ‘no’ to your ‘self’ in order to say ‘yes’ to God. It is subjecting the whole structure of your ego to the demands of God.”
· “Now this is not easy. This is where most of us miss the mark.”[At this point, Dr. King tells the story of the Good Samaritan.]
· “Now, the question of the Levite & Priest was: What will happen to me if I stop to help this man. The question of the Samaritan was: What will happen to this man if I don’t stop to help him. Ultimately the thing that determines whether a man is a Christian is how he answers this question.”
· “Here is a boy or girl, confronted with some undesirable habit. Too often the first question that is asked is, What will happen to me, my popularity, my social acceptance if I don’t do this. How many times have we degraded our characters, trampled over principles, because we were more concerned about our selfish desires than about the transcendent principles of God.”
· “There are many White people who are for justice and fair play, but they are afraid to speak. (Give example of preachers.)”
“There is a second point in this text [Matthew 16:24] which well illustrates the hardness of the Christian life. It is the word ‘cross’.” Jesus is not giving some mechanical scheme to be his disciple. Nor is he giving some ritualistic form such as wearing a cross. Jesus is not speaking of burdens we are forced to bear. A burden is the inevitable load which life lays on every man. Taking up the cross is the voluntary or deliberate choice of putting ourselves without reservation at the service of Christ and his kingdom; it is putting our whole being in the struggle against evil, whatever the cost.”
***
Jessica Hockett started attacking me on Twitter at the same time that Mark Kulacz suddenly started mocking my background as having grown up abused in a cult. In fact, they swarmed some of my tweets together, and I've been sent screen shots from Mark's Twitter group where he does weird stuff like suggests that I might have given him COVID intentionally. It was pretty disturbing, and just as disturbing is that JJ Couey went along with him. He has some good pieces of the story that need to be heard, but seems to be in a bad mental space.
I did a little background research on Jessica and found that she was being pushed by Betsy DaVos whose school choice education mission seems supicious to me. Those people attacked me when I was trying to get an education program set up in 2019, a story I may write about. DaVos's brother is Erik Prince who was at the center of the QAnon psyop and founder of Blackwater, which took money from Monsanto to infiltrate dissident groups.
I also found what appeared to be a deleted Hockett profile at the heavily Rockefeller-funded Hoover Institution. I believe that Hoover has people participating in all kinds of controlled opp psyops these past few years. Some of them were involved with the Intellectual Dark Web, which looks on closer inspection like a team put together to sell vaccines to confused skeptics.
https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/was-the-intellectual-dark-web-assembled
This is a much longer read than 20 min for me!
But wow! So much to think about 🙏🏻🙏🏻