I knew I was putting myself out there when I blogged about the Rev. Brandon Holthaus’ unique views on meat alternatives.
I also knew not everyone would be happy with what I would write. But I naively thought the people who would take exception to what I wrote would be those who agreed with Holthaus, or those who thought I was being self-righteous in how I questioned the truthfulness of what he said.
So, it was a little surprising to learn that multiple people appeared to think I was validating what he said.
Just in case you missed the blog post to which I am referring, I addressed what I heard while listening to the program, “Understanding the Times,” on the Christian-based Bott Radio Network. On that show, Holthaus, of Rockharbor Church in Bakersfield, California, expressed his opposition to the meat alternative movement. His most surprising comment was this: “There’s a strategy by the globalists to get us off of protein. What we know is that (if) you restrict protein, especially in third world countries, many people will die, and they don’t have a problem with that. They want to reduce the population by 70%. So they’re going to force global starvation and limit the protein. … I don’t think it’s an accident because again, the whole global movement wants to do a major depopulation to get it down to about 1 billion people on the planet. That’s a lot of death, and they say they want it in a civilized way. The civilized way looks like it’s going to be starvation.”
Yes, this does sound like he could be accusing people of genocidal thinking. And it also sounds like it could be nothing more than a conspiracy theory.
I carefully phrased my thoughts in that it appeared that in making these comments, Holthaus, who should be moving others to follow the Ten Commandments, was maybe breaking the ninth of those commandments, which is to not bear false witness (tell lies about) other people. I didn’t come right out and say he was breaking that commandment because I didn’t want to put myself at risk of breaking that commandment myself.
I also expressed confidence that the meat and poultry industries should never have to resort to repeating what I found to be an odd statement from Holthaus.
Yes, I did repeat what he said, but I also expressed skepticism in what he said.
The reality is that there’s no way to validate what he said as true or false. I mean, I’m pretty sure nobody is going to say, “Yes, I’m a globalist, and yes, I, like other globalists, want to cause fatal starvation in mass quantities.”
Was the network out of line?
The main reason I wrote the initial blog post about Holthaus’ comments was because he discussed a topic that was of interest to our regular readers.
But if I’m being totally honest, I also hoped that some people outside of our regular readership would see it, too. I’m talking about the management at Bott Radio Network, Holthaus, and his host, Jan Markell.
It’s true I enjoy a number of the pastors featured on the network. And while I was a little subtle in how I phrased it, I’m not necessarily a fan of those shows like “Understanding the Times,” which the network refers to as “Christian news and information.” That’s a case where I probably chose my words too carefully.
As much as I like some of the station’s programming, I find many of these news shows tedious, because it appears they put a disproportionate emphasis on the scriptures that make “the libs” look bad. I think Bott is doing its listeners a disservice in that it should be doing more to stress all scriptures, including the ninth commandment.
Any regular follower of my blog has probably figured out that I don’t have much patience for hyper-partisan thinking, and like I wrote, this particular radio program did nothing to enhance my spiritual walk.
Thanks for the feedback
There’s an old adage that goes something like “people don’t care how much you know until they know how much you care.” That applies to my blog. I wouldn’t have subjected myself to criticism if I didn’t care.
I refuse to be bland with my blog, and I would guess nobody thought that last post was bland. It did provoke some people. And that’s O.K. Anybody who’s spent any time around me probably thinks I’m not a jerk.
What the blog post did do was get people thinking, so I’d say the latest post was a success.
Blogs are a different sort of writing than news, to which it’s O.K. to infuse some opinions. Hopefully my opinions are a little clearer now. And hopefully you know it’s O.K. if your opinions differ from mine.
Having said that, I have one more opinion to share. I am sincerely thankful for everybody who took time out of their day to read my last blog post and am even more thankful for those people who took additional time out of their day to give me feedback. That shows that what I do is important to them, and that is one of the greatest compliments I can receive.
