Conspiracy Theories and Guilt by Association Fallacy
Conspiracy theories can be very misleading and are full of logical fallacies which ultimately leads to false information. Although I find the book "The Babylonian Connection?" by Ralph Woodrow to be faulty, however I would even say one of my former references "The Two Babylons" is also full of logical fallacies rather than testing the pagan practices of Roman Catholicism with how they violate the Bible's principles. As said, the argument itself has been stemming more on the similarities between the Catholic view of Mary and the pagan goddess Semiramis rather than condemning the whole act as idolatry according to the Bible. Fortunately the book "Truth Encounter" doesn't do that and is rather focused on why Catholicism is unbiblical than spend too much time comparing it to pagan practice. Conspiracy theories tend to commit logical fallacies like guilt by association, fallacy of division and ad homimen but more importantly, guilt by association like these examples of arguments that are really invalid in conspiracy theories and why I only use the Bible as my parameter of right and wrong:
Every person that does certain hand signs gets automatically labeled as "Illumati and occult" which is really nothing more than an illogical conclusion. For example you could actually say this that the company is a member of the Church of Satan or the Illuminati because of that "okay sign" which can be easily interpreted as "six, six, six" which the late Pope John Paul II (left) is doing. Now the okay sign does look like a six but not every one who does it is pledging an allegiance to Satan. While I do agree that the okay sign does look like a 666 but remember, both the late Pope John Paul II and Mr. Liempo's doing the hand sign can mean "okay".
One may end up concluding that Charles Haddon Spurgeon was a Freemason or an Occultist because he did the same pose as Napoleon Bonaparte which can be called the "Hidden Hand". But do you know what the Freemasons and Jesuits ALSO COPIED hand signs from other people like shaking hands and do you know Jesuits and Freemasons also pat each other on the back like saved Christians do? So if I did any handshakes or patted my brother-in-Christ on the back as the Jesuits and Freemasons do, does that make me a Freemason? Sad to say but conspiracy theorists are usually very close-minded and tend to think only within their own confined spaces.
Now just for a bit of the history of this "Hidden Hand". From research, one can see that from the 18th to the 19th century, this was also called the Hand in Waistcoat gesture, most often associated with Napoleon Bonaparte. Nobody really knew the reasons why Napoleon did the pose but apparently, it became a fad. Later the Communists, Freemasons, and Jesuits would also copy the pose. If you are going to say that "so and so" is a Jesuit/Communist/Freemason based on having a picture of doing the Napoleon pose then you might as well be careful. Remember that based on the picture above, the godly preacher Spurgeon also did the Hand in Waistcoat gesture too, and he was a firm enemy of the Jesuits! Remember just because a person does a peace sign does not make them a servant of Nero nor does doing a rock and roll hand sign make one a Satanist. True Satanists have been doing certain hand gestures but remember, the standard for right and wrong is on the Word of God.
Now just for a bit of the history of this "Hidden Hand". From research, one can see that from the 18th to the 19th century, this was also called the Hand in Waistcoat gesture, most often associated with Napoleon Bonaparte. Nobody really knew the reasons why Napoleon did the pose but apparently, it became a fad. Later the Communists, Freemasons, and Jesuits would also copy the pose. If you are going to say that "so and so" is a Jesuit/Communist/Freemason based on having a picture of doing the Napoleon pose then you might as well be careful. Remember that based on the picture above, the godly preacher Spurgeon also did the Hand in Waistcoat gesture too, and he was a firm enemy of the Jesuits! Remember just because a person does a peace sign does not make them a servant of Nero nor does doing a rock and roll hand sign make one a Satanist. True Satanists have been doing certain hand gestures but remember, the standard for right and wrong is on the Word of God.
We could also have the false argument of, "Hey that clinic is part of the Illuminati" because of the use of an eye logo. I mean I could easily be an eye doctor and put an eye design on my logo to specify that I am an eye doctor but that does not make me part of the occult. The same can go for lightning signs (used by power companies), an owl can be used by academic institutions without being affiliated with the Jesuits or Freemasons, skull and crossbones is also a warning sign for poison or danger, birdcages can be used to symbolize a pet shop, a fish sign can symbolize somebody is a member of a fishing club, umbrellas are used during the rain, and there are many more signs and symbols that are used by the Illuminati for religious reasons that have ended up being used by commoners for non-religious reasons. I am amazed to think about how many people are driven paranoid by conspiracy theories to the point they don't think logically.
Likewise, I've heard that Helen Keller was an occultist but does that mean sign language is satanic and anybody who does the supposed "horn hand" that rock stars are doing is an agent of the Devil? I would admit that even if she was, that doesn't mean what she made was satanic. Hippocrates was a pagan yet doctors today adhere to the Hippocratic oath and Mathematicians adhere to the Pythagorean Theorem. The pagan Romans were inventors of the Roman Calendar which we use today. Chinese pagans also invented the use of chopsticks. Louis Pasteur was an unsaved Roman Catholic though he contributed largely to bacteriology and prolonging the shelf-life of milk. Rejecting them because of the origin would be both an Ad Hominem (attacking the person instead of the argument) and a genetic fallacy. What should be rejected are not the non-religious inventions of the heathen which seeks to make our lives easier but the doctrine of heathendom.
Likewise, I've heard that Helen Keller was an occultist but does that mean sign language is satanic and anybody who does the supposed "horn hand" that rock stars are doing is an agent of the Devil? I would admit that even if she was, that doesn't mean what she made was satanic. Hippocrates was a pagan yet doctors today adhere to the Hippocratic oath and Mathematicians adhere to the Pythagorean Theorem. The pagan Romans were inventors of the Roman Calendar which we use today. Chinese pagans also invented the use of chopsticks. Louis Pasteur was an unsaved Roman Catholic though he contributed largely to bacteriology and prolonging the shelf-life of milk. Rejecting them because of the origin would be both an Ad Hominem (attacking the person instead of the argument) and a genetic fallacy. What should be rejected are not the non-religious inventions of the heathen which seeks to make our lives easier but the doctrine of heathendom.
Then we can end up having the logical argument of this and that is wrong just because Roman Catholicism does it and not because the Bible says it's right and wrong. We have non-Christians like Teresa of Calcutta, Jesuit priests or Buddhist monks doing projects to help poor and malnourished people around the world. I've seen Jesuit priests doing outreach projects, Taoist or Buddhist organizations donating relief goods for calamity victims, Buddha though a pagan did feeding projects but that does not by any means make feeding projects for the poor wrong altogether! It's also as stupid as the Seventh Day Adventist argument that since Roman Catholics worship on Sunday, therefore worshiping Sunday is wrong. In fact, you might want to take a look at this verse in Jeremiah 7:18, God did not condemn the baking of cakes as an act but the baking of cakes for the pagan goddess, the Queen of Heaven. In Matthew 5:47 we read that Jesus said that pagans even do things like forgiving and salutations, but that doesn't make it wrong. Pagan practices are wrong not because pagans do them but because the Bible condemns them like human sacrifice is murder and worshiping false gods violates the first and second commandment.
That's the problem of not putting the Bible first, you make an assumption as stupid as what I've just mentioned. Truth need be told that some conspiracy theorists tend to argue that Mary worship is wrong using paganism as a comparison rather than the Bible as a parameter that it's idolatrous. If that's the case then a lot of stuff in the Bible is also pagan because of events like Jesus' virgin birth and Samson slaying the lion. What is so often overlooked is that pagan stories also copied from the Bible just like writers of fiction base some events in their fiction on what really happened. Which again, guilt by association arguments result in stupid debates and that's why I don't enter into debates and that's why the Bible is my only parameter for right and wrong. Overall, that's why Phil Johnson has every right to put some Independent Baptist pages into the bookmark of bad theology. Sad to say, many Independent Baptists have ended up with foolish conspiracy theories rather than focus on God's Word to the point they end up preaching silly sermons like that ridiculously stupid "Pisseth Against the Wall" sermon. It's very out of context!
As said, I leave those conspiracy theorists alone because they are a waste of time plus they can go ahead and say what they want about me like being a Jesuit priest in disguise, etc. they're just wasting their time anyway.