Why I Don't Recommend Reading "Reformation Online" by Patrick Scrivener

-

I was thinking about one of the many sites which I used to visit before was called Reformation Online. the site (at first) seemed fascinating until you realize its webmaster, Patrick Scrivener, is really no better than the late Alberto R. Rivera (whom he endorses as a truth-teller) or the late Jack T. Chick. You can find there's a lot of dangerous (and often convoluted) mixture of truths with conspiracy theories. I wonder if the guy is secretly on drugs? 

What's really so dishonest is that Scrivener dares to write this on the front page of his site:

WELCOME TO THE REFORMATION ONLINE—THE MOST TIMELY AND TRUTHFUL SITE ON THE INTERENT!

There's this warning that if it's too good to be true, don't believe it! This is the problem with Scrivener and his use of intellectual dishonestly while claiming to be very truthful. A con artist will usually exaggerate his claims in order to get his product sold or to get the money. It turns out that Rivera, as a pastor, was a con man who swindled people out of their money for personal gain. Also, Rivera's story would sell a lot more copies than the testimonies of two real former Jesuit priests such as Victor Affonso (who was in Spain during Francisco Franco's regime) and Bob Bush. Neither Affonso nor Bush told a story as fantastic as Rivera's! So, it seems that the pattern fits together that Scrivener could be a dangerous con artist!

Back then, I really started having issues with his website with how it's riddled with logical fallacies, false information, and various conspiracy theories to drive one paranoid. I could evaluate them as follows to show the guy is really messed up: 

  • The writer claims that the name Jesus is supposedly derived after Zeus. This is really laughable for one reason. Do they bother to study Greek hard enough to know that Jesus is Joshua and Zeus means something entirely different? If they bother to re-read the King James Version which they use - they will realize that the Greek is Jesus. Just because they sound alike doesn't mean that they mean the same thing!
  • The writer also believes in the serpent seed doctrine. They believe in a pre-Flood world that would be found only in Hollywood movies (such as the blasphemous "Noah" movie a few years ago) or in classical mythology. How can you even have animal hybrids in the pre-Flood world when God already designed animals to reproduce according to its kind? Just where are the fossils to prove their existence? It's too riddled in the fantasy of sinister Hollywood movies and pagan mythology than the truth found in the Scriptures and science. 
  • The writer believes that Buddha is born on December 25 while comparing Buddhism and Catholicism. The Dalai Lama is not the Buddhist Pope since there are many schools of Buddhism which often clash with their ideals. Buddha is not born on December 25 (in fact, his birthday according to Buddhist and Hindu traditions differ) and neither was Jesus. December 25 was only assigned as a supposed date of Jesus' birth but that's not even confirmed or denied! What's important is that Jesus was born so He can save us from our sins! 
    • Note that the same article claims Mao Zedong an atheist was supposedly a devout Buddhist. I find that claim ridiculous! Mao was devoted to destroying religion so why would he even be a Buddhist?
    • Another page of the said website says that Mao Zedong is a Muslim. Wait, didn't the same site said earlier that Mao was a devout Buddhist all his life when he was an atheist? 
  • The writer believes that John the Baptist was Elijah while blatantly lying that he doesn't believe that the latter was reincarnated into the former. Let's consider Hindu mythology on how reincarnation happens. Did Vishnu die before he became any of his incarnations? He didn't die at all before he became different persons in different lifetimes. Instead, Vishnu took the form of several people even getting born in a human body other different human mothers in different lifetimes. I wonder do they not understand that calling John the Baptist as Elijah is a figure of speech just like Jesus called the bread His body?
  • The writer also has some questionable science going on. Apparently, he believes that vaccination and pasteurization are harmful - which may be solely based on the fact that Edward Jenner and Louis Pasteur were Roman Catholics. I'm against Roman Catholicism but I won't dismiss any truth that the average Roman Catholic today may be saying even if I disagree with his or her theological beliefs. He thinks that both practices have allegedly created a medical inquisition:
    • The claim that raw milk is supposedly "better" hasn't been backed up by any real studies at all. He thinks that raw milk was outlawed thanks to an ongoing medical inquisition. Does he even know the dangers of drinking raw milk? Does the writer himself know how pasteurization actually works? I guess he should dismiss Louis Pasteur's proofs against Darwinian evolution too, right? Only today, we've found better, more effective methods than Pasteur could've dreamed of. I wonder does he even drink his milk raw or does he hypocritically drink pasteurized milk behind our backs? If he does more research then he will realize boiling milk was already a practice of preservation and healthy living before the term pasteurization was ever invented. If he thinks raw milk is better then he should drink it without landing into the Intensive Care Unit (ICU)!
    • If he does enough research - he may realize that Louis Pasteur is mentioned by "Answers in Genesis" and "Creation Ministries International" (CMI) as an outstanding scientist. Pasteur's contributions have given a lot of stuff to make life easier today such as vaccination and pasteurization. 
    • Apparently, the writer of the site doesn't do much scientific research and is guilty of using the fallacy of genetic fallacy together with guilt by association. Would he dismiss the Gregorian Calendar because a Pope invented it or the principles of Mendelian genetics because a Roman Catholic monk wrote down the study? He might as well reject modern mathematics because much of its foundations are from Greece and Egypt. I guess engineers today should reject Trigonometry which was heavily used by the Egyptians and Greeks. 
    • The printing press which lately benefitted the Reformation was invented by a Roman Catholic named Johannes Gutenberg. Sadly, his invention was later outlawed by the Vatican itself!
    • You may consider reading "CMI, vaccines, and vaccination" from CMI. While there are indeed cases of people who create epidemics to sell vaccines, there are also honest people who administer vaccination for a good cause. 
  • The writer carries on the same lie that Jesuits supposedly invented futurism. He does believe that the Antichrist is a dynasty. What makes it laughable is that he uses 1 John 2:18 to justify it while ignoring that there's a difference between many antichrists and the Antichrist. Clear distinction yet he can't get it like how Roman Catholics just don't get the distinction between Peter as a rock and the Rock (Matthew 16:18-19). So much for criticizing Roman Catholics for not being able to discern the differences if he too can't discern!
  • The writer also has had made some claims about knowing certain Vatican "secrets" from various sources which may be questionable at best. While I don't deny that the Vatican is indeed the evilest covert organization ever - this site tends to feed on anti-Catholic hysteria more than it focuses on winning Catholics to the Lord. I do believe that the Jesuits and the Illuminati are causing trouble here and there but you can't blame them for all the troubles in the world. Does this guy even think that both the Jesuits and the Illuminati can now even control the weather? Is the writer even watching too many Hollywood movies that his claims tend to be too fantastic at times? 
It would be best to mark the site as a dangerous source that must be avoided at all costs! The guy will just drive you paranoid.