Truth is the first casualty of war … Worldview, Spin & Narrative Creation During War

Most people have heard the old bromide; “Truth is the first casualty of war.” 

This explains why I listen to war reports from Iran in a very jaded manner. I have learned how truth gets so badly mangled during war. In World War I there was the propaganda from the Allies that Germans were throwing Belgian babies in the air and catching them on their bayonets. Also, there were multiple reports of how the Germans would crucify farmers on the farmer’s barn doors. In World War II we all know of the propaganda that advanced the nonsense that the Germans were making fine bone China out of Jewish bones, or how the Germans were turning Jews into soap, or how the Germans used Jewish skin to make lampshades. The Soviets lied about Katyn forest. The Kuwaitis lied about Iraqi soldiers dumping Kuwaiti babies out of their neo-natal units in hospitals.  Artist Frederic Remington who had been assigned to cover the building Spanish-American conflict in 1897 once famously cabled Newspaper Magnate Randolph Hearst who had assigned Remington to cover the war; “I can find no war.” 

Hearst cabled back; “Please remain [in Cuba]. You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war.”

From Abraham Lincoln’s propaganda that pinned the blame of the war on the South when he was the one who had committed a naked act of aggression — all of which vaulted the nation into the War of Northern Aggression, to Hitler’s dressing up German soldiers as Polish soldiers in order to contend that the Poles attacked the Germans to give pretext to German invasion of Poland, to the British bald face lies to their public about the Boers being the aggressors in the Boer War, one has to be a fool to believe anything that they are being told by media outlets during a war, because truth is the first casualty of war.

So, where does that leave us in our (US) tidy little war with Israel against Iran? It means that we have to be very jaded about any and every report from anybody and everybody. The incentive to lie and propagandize during war is massive since the stakes are so high. War, you see, is as much about public perception as it is about the bombs being dropped. He who can create the war narrative will have the odds on their side when it comes to winning the war.

This means, that one can’t not buy into just one information outlet. One should be dipping into (as they can) different outlets for information. Also, one has to keep in mind that when they are dipping into different information outlets that they are learning more about the worldview of people who run those outlets then they are learning about the war. Wars, are events that create the possibility of changing the world but the change comes not so much from bombs dropping as the ability to create and foster a new macro narrative. In War (and other like events – the myth of climate change comes to mind) what is being sought out to accomplish is the ushering in of a new narrative template by which the world will be organized and so during war, all the information outlets are doing their damnedest to have the narrative they’re spinning to be the narrative that  attains hegemony. So, because that is true, you’re information outlets giving you “news” about the war, is in point of fact giving you their narrative they want you to accept — a narrative that is based on their worldview. The reporting of information outlets during the time of war tells you more about the worldview of the outlet reporting the news than it tells you about what is happening in the war.

So, for example, if you listen to Iranian outlets, they will give you a completely different accounting of the war than you will get from Jewish information outlets. FOX news on the war will give you a different war than the war you’ll be told about at CNN or MS NOW, will give you a different war than Al Jazeera, will give you a different war than Russia Today. The reason for all these different wars, which are reputedly the same war, is because it is not the war reporting that is really important but the narrative that can be spun out of the war reporting. You can count on the fact, that when it comes to these world changing type of events that information outlets are not trying to tell you about the event itself but are seeking to shape your worldview.

When we get to the nitty gritty that means when you watch Tucker Carlson or Joe Scarborough, or the maniac Sen. Lindsey Graham, or Douglas MacGregor, or Jeffrey Sachs, or John Mearsheimer, etc. you have to try to spend some time digging into their worldview in order to discern what spin they are seeking to put forth.

I am not saying that all that exists is spin and the truth is impossible to arrive at. That would be a post-modern view of truth. What I am saying is that you can’t allow yourself to be spoon-fed by any one information outlet. The truth is, as they say, out there, but in a spin heavy environment, tracking it down is not easy to do.

Also, in this context, I would champion the idea of learning worldview thinking. Worldview thinkers are equipped to smell spin. Christian worldview thinkers are better able to identify the presuppositions that are governing the information outlets. Christian worldview thinkers, having a Christian world and life view can spot when reporting is being driven by an ideology/theology that is discernably false.

We piece together the best we can from various reports what is happening in our war du Jour. We piece it together based on our worldview and not based on the worldview of the talking head who is trying to sway us with misinformation. (And most of them know they are dishing out misinformation.)

It is a complicated world and for the consumer of information one has to remember another old bromide …. “Let the buyer of war information beware.”

From The Mailbag — Tearing Down The Simulation/Matrix

 Dear Pastor;

“How do we overthrow the system that is serving as our Simulation/Matrix.”

Hello Evan,

Thank you for the question.

The answer is manifold.

First, folks like Ben Mordecai have to realize that we are living in a Matrix. We will never overcome the Matrix (The Simulation) by thinking that working within the context of the Matrix — by the rules of the simulation — we will overcome the simulation. So, there is the work of awakening people to the fact that they really are living in a simulation/Matrix.

Second, we overthrow the the Simulation by doing all we can to unplug from it. Many people are doing that by prioritizing family life, by raising their children in the fear of the Lord and so not sending them to the Simulation Education boxes. If we cannot raise our children aware of the need, for the cause of Christ, to themselves see the Matrix for what it is there will be no overthrowing the Matrix/Simulation.

Unplugging means also building parallel but not isolated sub-cultures. People have talked about developing a currency that could be used on a local basis. (This is not my strength but I have read some of those floating this idea.) People have talked about building businesses that especially but not solely cater to the needs of a Christian community. By doing so, we could increasingly unplug from the Simulation/Matrix.

Unplugging also means understanding the doctrine of interposition. If, by God’s grace alone, our numbers become sufficient, at some point larger attacks on the Simulation/Matrix will have to be considered. Since, we will not have the support of Magistrates (who are now serving Baal) we will have to operate via the doctrine of interposition as headed by Clergy/Elder magistrates — if we can find any. Much like Elijah interposed himself against Ahab and His priests on Mt. Carmel, so at some point Christian Elders/Clergy will have to rise up to stand against the prophets of Baal as serving our current Ahabs.

Unplugging also means we have to start connecting the teaching of our Catechisms and Confessions with Worldview teaching. Being in the ministry almost 40 years now I have discovered that even people well catechized often end up being normies living in the Matrix/Simulation. In my estimation only a people thoroughly training in Christian Worldview training as combined with the teaching of the Confessions and Catechisms will ever get out of the Simulation/Matrix that we are now living in.

Unplugging also means (and people aren’t going to like this one) departing from the NAPARC/CREC/SBC churches. Certainly, there are some congregations in NAPARC that are healthy, but considered generally, NAPARC/CREC/SBC congregations are the problem. NAPARC/CREC/SBC churches, generally speaking (which is different than Universally speaking) are supporting the Simulation/Matrix system that needs to be torn down brick by brick. In attending and supporting these denominations we are working against the need to get out of the Matrix/Simulation. If we want to tear down the Simulation/Matrix we simply must quit supporting these derelict institutions with their derelict ministers. (Hey guys … if the shoe doesn’t fit don’t wear it.)

Unplugging means a return to God’s Law-Word as the standard by which we live, move and have our being. The Simulation/Matrix we are living in exists because God’s Law-Word (especially in its politicus usus) is being set aside for humanist Law-Word. We see this in postmodernism which teaches, at best, that law-words are community relative. We see this in Legal-Positivism which teaches the Rousseauian idea of the General Will in one form or another. We see this in Natural Law theory that posits that fallen man is not so fallen as to no longer have the ability to even want to live by God’s law. The Simulation/Matrix we are living in will not be torn down until there is a return to the foundation upon which real reality can be built.

We remember the words of Christ that some things only go out by prayer and fasting. I take this to mean that we have to understand that tearing down the Matrix/Simulation is first and foremost a spiritual endeavor and by that I mean we have to see that that which is animating the Simulation/Matrix is principalities and forces. Before unplugging can be successful we have to understand that the Simulation/Matrix is an expression of this present evil age as animated by the Prince of the power of the air. Because of this we must be instant in connecting the dots between the corporeal realities and the spiritual realities that animate them and then we must pray God that He might let us land just one Samson like blow (think Pillars and Philistines) in order to bring the whole Simulation/Matrix down on their heads.

Or we could just ignore all this like good little amillennialists and live in the Simulation/Matrix telling ourselves that this is the way God intends for it to be until He returns.

Editor Gregory Reynolds and Author Aaron Mize Join To Piss On Scripture

“In this light, the modern habit of translating these texts into the language of ‘leadership’ or ‘male authority’ is a reversion to the very power structures the gospel overturns.”

Rev. Aaron Mize
Ordained Servant Magazine
OPC

Note, the implicit declaration here that power structures are inherently evil. Power structures are overturned so that no power structures (supposedly) remain. Power is automatically evil. Patriarchy and hierarchy are automatically evil because they are power structures.

The dirty secret here is that power structures are an inescapable category. As such if, as Mize desires, we get rid of the power structures of patriarchy and hierarchy what fills the vacuum is matriarchy and egalitarianism as the new power structures. So, hierarchy doesn’t go away but is replaced by egalitarianism that serves as a mask for a rampant Matriarchy. If men do not rule (patriarchy) then women will rule (matriarchy). Somebody has to have the authority folks. If we are going to denounce patriarchy then all that is left to fill the void is matriarchy but as we can’t be obvious we will call it egalitarianism instead.

Next, if the Gospel overturns the power structures of hierarchy that Rev. Mize insists that it overturns then pray tell why all that language in the Westminster Larger Catechism (Q. 124-130) about the duties and sins of superiors, and inferiors? Mize’s own Confession, that he swore to uphold, teaches that hierarchy is Biblical and yet here is Mize insisting that Christ came to overturn these sinful power structures.

And what about the Editor, Gregory Reynolds, who let this bilge be printed? Greg Reynolds is older than I am, for Pete’s sake, and he let this get into the magazine he edits? As far as I am concerned Gregory Reynolds should be ash-canned for letting Mize’s garbage be printed.

Rev. Aaron Mize & His Gaia Worship

“Scripture never presents patriarchy as the created or redeemed norm. It is a feature of the fallen world Christ overturns, not a structure he institutes.”

Rev. Aaron Mize
Ordained Servant Article
OPC Denomination

1.) Not as the created norm? Is this why we are told that Eve was to be a “Helpmeet” to Adam? Is this why Adam was the one who gave Eve her name? (Naming was a sign of authority.) Is this why, after the fall, Eve is told that “Adam shall rule over you”? Is this why Sarah called Abraham “Lord?”

2.) Not as the redeemed norm? Is this why Paul tells Titus that women in the Church are to be submissive to their own husbands? Is this why Paul teaches that women are to be “silent in the church?”

3.) Note that what Mize is teaching here is that a woman who is fulfilling the Biblical and traditional role as wife, mother, and homekeeper, who is submitting to her husband as he love his wife is in sin because, as Mize writes, this kind of patriarchy and hierarchy is a feature of the fallen world Christ overturns. If a woman is living in a world Christ has overturned, as seen in her role as wife, mother, and homekeeper, what can she be living in except sin?

4.) Patriarchy … is not a structure that Christ institutes? Is this why Christ chose 12 male disciples? Is this why the Church chose 7 male deacons? Is this why all those who wrote every book of the Bible were men? Is this why all family heads in the OT were male? Is this why the Aaronic Priesthood was all male?

It beggars the imagination that any clergy in any putative Reformed church could write the sentence, “Patriarchy is a feature of the fallen world Christ overturns, not a structure he institutes.”

The OPC Embraces Explicit Egalitarianism — Rev. Mize & The Ordained Servant

“The Fatherhood of God is not an archetype of hierarchy but the source of communion. To imitate that Fatherhood is not to rule but to give life. The Church’s task therefore is not to restore a patriarchal system in the world but to embody the new humanity.”

Rev. Aaron Mize
Ordained Servant Magazine
Orthodox Presbyterian Church

Often the egalitarians and complementarians will insist that I Cor. 11 does not mean what it says;

I Corinthians 11:3 But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.

They will insist that the Greek word for head here (κεφαλὴ / kephalē) means “source” and not head. First, this interpretation was seldom if ever argued before the rise of feminism in the Church. Second, this Greek word is universally translated as “Head” in every other NT passage. Third, if we argue that this word means “source” then we run into the problem that Paul is saying that source of Christ is God and that in turn would run us into some major theological problems.

When we note that the head of Christ is God we remember that Christ is the title that our Savior held and in His role as the incarnated anointed one (Christ) God indeed was the head of Chris in the sense that we find in Phil. 2:5-8. The Son in his economic role as the incarnate Christ was always about the doing of the Father’s will, thus demonstrating the Father’s headship over Christ in his economic subordination.

This submitting of Christ to the Father during his economic subordination serves as the model for man’s submission to Christ and the woman’s submission to man. Christ’s economic subordination reflects the divine order and harmony within the Godhead, providing a pattern for human relationships.

So, Aaron Mize, in his written words above is in contradiction to the clear revelation of Scripture. Further, the OPC Ordained Servant inasmuch as it published this tripe is also in contradiction to the clear revelation of Scripture. Heads need to roll over this contradiction of Scripture.

What Mize and the OPC Ordained servant has given us with the opening quote is the affirmation of egalitarianism in its worst expression. Not only does Rev. Mize (we say “Rev.” only by way of courtesy) desire to jettison patriarchy, he even insists that hierarchy must be evacuated. Mize desires to give us a “new humanity,” as only envisioned by Albigensians, Cathars, Bogomils, Anabaptists, and Marxists.

By all that is Holy has the Conservative Reformed church fallen so far that it is now putting people in the pulpit, and further publishing them in denominational magazines wherein what is promoted is the very antithesis of Biblical Christianity?

Keep in mind dear reader, that what Mize has promoted here with the right hand in the Reformed Church is perfectly consistent with what is being promoted with the left hand in the Reformed Church as it continues its witch hunt to stamp out white Kinism. (Ironically enough, the Reformed church seems perfectly fine with Black, Korean, and Hmong Kinism.) The egalitarianism required to advance the bilge that Rev. Mize is advancing above is the same egalitarianism that is being championed to drum godly ministers out of the putatively conservative Reformed Churches. I guess the cynic could say; “Well, at least they are being consistent.”

They tell me that the Rev. Aaron Mize article, “In Defense of Union Not Patriarchy,” has been pulled from the OPC Ordained Servant website. clearly this is due to the heat that the effeminate Mize’s article created.

However, this does not mean that the OPC is out of the woods here.

1.) Mize wrote the article and hasn’t himself recanted/repented.

2.) Editors and/or Publishers let this article be published. They need to recant (preferably repent in ashes and dust).

3.) There needs to be an apology written in the Ordained Servant.

4.) Actually, people need to be brought up on charges here — (Mize and those who made the decision to run the article) unless their is a full throated repentance.

5.) Without a full throated repentance you can count on the fact that this kind of bilge will be repeated.

This is how this agenda is advanced. First you push the envelope and then you retreat if needs be. However, if you retreat its always a temporary retreat with the intent to push forward again at some later date.

This is the practitioning of the Hegelian dialectic.

If the OPC doesn’t demand repentance … and if it doesn’t fire or bring up people on charges due to this article running, you can bet the farm that this article will return in some other form at a later date.

These people are not to be trusted.

Post-script

From Dan Brannan on the subject of this Mize article;

I think it was my session (in Idaho) that got the article pulled. Now people are mounting a case to have charges brought against Mize.

Nonetheless, I have told the session that …

It’s absurd that he wrote it, absurd that they printed it, absurd that it falls to laymen pitching a fit to redress it, and absurd that he holds a position above greeter.