Image

Facebook Now “Fact-Checking” Your Interpretation of the Bible

“The policing of thought, appearances, and speech, is proof that the concept of governing bodies making themselves the ‘single source of truth’ isn’t a future possibility, it’s already a reality.”


In the plethora of substitute saviours, few in the contemporary era come close to Facebook’s far-left fact-checkers.

They are the elevated enlightened, and there’s no telling them otherwise.

Like Ceasar, a “fact-checker’s” thumbs up or thumbs down determines your level of existence.

You are Anderson. They are Agent Smith.

Try to separate the news from the carefully scripted narrative, – on Facebook anyway – and your assigned Chi-Comm style social credit score is downgraded.

“All-knowing, and all-seeing,” fact-checkers get the final say.

Couple this God complex with Facebook’s handlers who devalue a page because facts hurt someone’s feelings, and the circle of gnostic arrogance is complete.

These emerging computerised concentration camps reduce personhood to “user,” and user to a number.

This is because people, barcoded like products are easier to de-bank, easier to corral, and are far less fussed about being controlled.

This also centralises adherence to their programming.

Those controlled can be cancelled.

We’re already seeing PRIDE Tribunals punish Christians for simply refusing to live by lies (see here, here and here).

The policing of thought, appearances, and speech, is proof that the concept of governing bodies making themselves the “single source of truth” isn’t a future possibility, it’s already a reality.

After posting a meme critical of transgenderism on Facebook, my page was red-flagged.

Facebook’s (alleged independent) “fact-checkers” challenged the Biblical account of the demon, Legion’s use of the pronouns, “they/them/we/us.”

When I appealed the challenge on fact-based Biblical grounds, the response came from AAP, stating,

There was no exegesis, cross-referencing, engaging with koine Greek, authoritative scholars, or references to back them up.

AAP, who are not Bible scholars, nor theologians, appear to have made themselves both.

Additionally, AAP clearly agree the pronoun, they/them refers to the plural we/us/they/them.

Yet, by the very nature of the fact-check, APP – leaning on the PRIDE lens – also asserts, they/them refers to a singular individual.

In this case, an individual who identifies as transgender.

Both cannot be true.

“Fact-checkers” are making facts up.

I recently discussed this butchering of basic grammar with Steven Tripp, Adam Zahra, and Natalie Dumer.

The Australian Labor Party’s proposed Misinformation/Disinformation bill is set to enforce this confusion by enshrining forced speech into Australian law.

Government as “our single source of truth” will be the author of confusion, not peace.

Referring to abortion as anything other than “reproductive healthcare”? Sorry, you can no longer shop for clothes!

Refuse to refer to a mother breastfeeding her child, as a chest-feeding birthing parent? Strike two, no dinner for you!

More to the point, if this law passes, heaven help grandma who innocently “harms” any they/them “individual” because she used the plural pronoun properly.

WATCH:

The Caldron Pool Show

The Caldron Pool Show: #15 – Laura Klassen
The Caldron Pool Show: #19 – Ian Miles Cheong
The Caldron Pool Show: #35 – Soy Globalism (with Raw Egg Nationalist)
The Caldron Pool Show: #22 – Rod Lampard
Image

Support

If you value our work and would like to support us, you can do so by visiting our support page. Can’t find what you’re looking for? Visit our search page.

Copyright © 2023, Caldron Pool

Permissions

Everything published at Caldron Pool is protected by copyright and cannot be used and/or duplicated without prior written permission. Links and excerpts with full attribution are permitted. Published articles represent the opinions of the author and may not reflect the views of all contributors at Caldron Pool.