The Convolution of Simplicity: An Essay of Warning Concerning the Teachings of Walter Veith

By: Austin E. Loignon

“Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation” (Mark 16:15).1 This

single line of scripture, often referred to as “the great commission,” is not the instruction or

teaching of disciple or apostle, but the very command of Christ himself. We, each of us, as

followers and believers in Christ Jesus are commanded by him to go into the world and share the

news of the gift of salvation to everyone we meet. Salvation through faith in Jesus Christ is the

focal point of Christianity and must be first and foremost in the minds of Christ’s followers and

ministers of the church. It is therefore the minister’s duty, when preaching, to make Christ and

his saving grace the central message in their discourse to the congregation.

Another version of Christ’s command to us is found in Matthew 28:19-20: “Therefore go

and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of

the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.” Here Jesus goes

a step further in his instruction to include what should be taught among his followers and to

those they are trying to convert. But what are these commands that we are to teach? Christ

answered this when he responded to the question of which commandment was the greatest. He

said, “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.

This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as

yourself. All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments” (Matthew 22:37-40).

This, when added to the first command from Jesus, orients the Christian to three simple, but

essential, tasks: 1. Love God, 2. Love each other, and 3. Spread the news of salvation.

1
Unless otherwise stated, all Scripture references in this study are taken from the New International Version of the
Bible, International Bible Society, Zondervan, 1973, 1978, 1984.

1
 Let us now make some things clear. We are all human, and humans err. None of us have

all the answers—none of us know all truths—and from time to time ministers and lay people

tend to convolute the simple principles of Christianity. When the bright, shining light of our faith

is filtered through the eccentric half-truths, and sometimes falsehoods, of men, that which

reaches the sinner is often nothing more than a faint glow. It is the simplicity of Christianity,

centered on the love and character of God, which makes it so viable to the sinner. “When the

gospel is rightly preached, it is as though one holds out a beautiful red apple to a child, or a glass

of cold water to a person dying of thirst…”2 It is this simple, life-giving water of the gospel that

Christians are obligated to preach to the parched world of sinners.

However obvious this goal might be to some Christians, the message is often clouded by

and to believers. Christ did not command the teaching of conspiracy theories. He did not

command us to spend time studying them, or preach them to others. We continually claim that

we are in Earth’s last days. If we truly believe this then we do not have time to spend learning

conspiracy theories, and sinners do not have time to waste listening to them. While I do not take

pleasure in questioning the authenticity of a brother or sister in Christ, I feel I cannot stand idly

by while history and Christianity are twisted to fit the personal views of one man—Walter Veith.

As many of you have no doubt heard this name before, I do not feel it necessary to

explain all of Veith’s teachings. Suffice it to say, he believes that the world and all organizations

in it, both Catholic and Protestant, are under the control of secret societies; such as the Jesuits,

the Freemasons, the Templars, and the Illuminati (all of which he claims are controlled by the

Roman Catholic Church). Even the Seventh-day Adventist Church, of which he is an ordained

minister, is infiltrated by these organizations—or so he claims. Conspiracy theorists are

2
Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Reflections on the Bible: Human Word and Word of God, ed. Manfred Weber, trans. M.
Eugene Boring (Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 2004), 40.

2
notorious for two things—historical inaccuracy and a lack of viable sources. Veith is at fault on

both counts. When quoting sources for his lectures he continually cites the works of other

conspiracy theorists, who themselves have no scholarship or historical background and lack

viable sources. He also predominantly quotes from authors and books published in the late

nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. These books were published in a time when the history

and knowledge of secret societies were in vogue in America. Books pertaining to these topics

were in high demand by publishers, and Americans were eager to soak up the “secret history” of

these societies and orders. The hastily written books from this era are infamous for their lack of

scholarship and their flagrant historical inaccuracy. In quoting these works Veith is doing

nothing more than finding supposedly reputable sources that support his conspiracy theories,

while ignoring the majority of scholarly sources that disagree with him. Perhaps even more

dangerous than this, though, is his neglect of the commands of Christ to preach the simple gospel

of salvation through the loving sacrifice of the Son of God.

Though there is not enough space in an essay to submit all of Veith’s historical

inaccuracies, some, for the sake of evidence, must be pointed out. A person’s education is

extremely important for education develops the logical and reasonable mind. None of us has to

be highly educated to understand the simple gospel of Christ, but to understand the truths and

falsehoods of history one must indeed be trained in the historical method. Many people refer to

Veith as a biblical and historical scholar. To date, he has received no such degree or certification

that would prove him to be a theologian or an historian. It is true that he does possess a Ph.D.,

but it is in the field of zoology, which is an entirely different realm from these other two

disciplines. In order to understand the intricacies of the historical context, and, more importantly,

the viability of historical sources, one must be trained in the historical method. The same is true

3
for the discipline of systematic theology, which centers the Christian in the eternal and

unshakable truth of the Father’s character and Christ’s sacrifice for the redemption of sinners.

To give a small sampling of some of the historical inaccuracies found in Veith’s lectures,

I went to his website (walterveith.com) and watched a single episode from his Total Onslaught

series. The episode is number 11 out of 36, and is entitled The Secret Behind Secret Societies.

The following are just a few examples of the ignorant misuse of history that abounds throughout

the lecture. Each sample begins with a time stamp of where in the video the example can be

found.

18:47/01:27:50—Here Veith claims that a double-headed eagle on an altar in a Catholic church

in Jerusalem is a symbol of Freemasonry. When properly inspected, however, it is quite
obviously the emblem of the Habsburg Dynasty (Imperial Austria). This family ruled over most
of Europe during the sixteenth century, and ruled Austria until the twentieth century. This
emblem served as their family crest long before Freemasonry and the Jesuits were formed. It
makes sense to see this emblem on an altar of a Catholic Church since the Habsburgs were
devoutly Catholic, and probably gave money towards the building of the church. Below is a
screenshot from Veith’s episode (Fig. 1) as compared to a full color version of the Habsburg
crest (Fig. 2). Notice that while the image on the altar is a stylized version of the same crest, the
shields on the chest of the eagles are the same—with the rampant lion of the Habsburg family to
the left of the shield, the three white eagles on the red stripe of the house of Lorraine, and the
Austrian flag in the center. Notice also, that both hold an orb, sword, and scepter.

Fig.1 Fig.2

4
0:24:21/01:27:50—Veith claims that the letters “IHS” above the doorways and crosses of Jesuit
churches stands for “Isis, Horus, Set” which he states is the Egyptian Trinity. Any novice in
Egyptology would flatly disagree with this; there is actually no such thing as an official
“Egyptian Trinity.” While there is no one actual “trinity” in the Egyptian pantheon, several sets
of a “divine family” (a triad of family gods) are present and take on the same form in each
example (father, mother, and son). Examples of these are the gods Amun, Mut, and their son
Khons (the ruling family triad of Thebes) and the most popular triad, Osiris, Isis, and their son
Horus.3 Set is the uncle of Horus and the brother of Isis, therefore he does not fit in with the
pattern of the family triad. Also, the English names for the Egyptian gods as we know them
today, did not even exist when the Jesuits were formed. The letters “IHS” actually stand for the
Latin phrase Iesus Hominum Salvator (Jesus, Savior of men). Veith would have us believe that
this monogram represents the Egyptian Trinity, which is inaccurate on multiple levels.

0:27:48/01:27:50—Here, Veith claims that the Egyptian god Anubis’ likeness is carved into the
door of a Catholic Church. While the animal at the top of the carving does indeed look like a
dog, it bears no specific markings similar to the actual images that are representative of Anubis.
Below is a screenshot from the video showing what Veith claims to be a carving portraying
Anubis (Fig. 3); next to it is the most common image of Anubis from Ancient Egypt (Fig.4).
Note that, when looking at the carving as a whole, it looks more likely to be a family crest with a
dog or hound on top of it. Family crests were often put on doors, windows, or altars in Catholic
churches if the family donated to the construction of the church. Note also the lack of symbols
and Egyptian dress associated with Anubis from the carving.

Fig. 3 Fig. 4

3
Helen Strudwick, ed., The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt (London: Amber Books Ltd., 2006) 112, 117.

5
0:28:37/01:27:50—Veith claims that the p-x symbol (screenshot Fig. 5) is the emblem of the
Egyptian god Horus. This is inaccurate. “The wedjat eye symbolizes the eye that Horus lost in
the battle with his evil uncle Seth [Set]. According to myth, it was found again by Isis, the
mother of Horus and wife of Osiris.”4 Fig. 6 shows the wedjat eye (commonly referred to as the
eye of Horus); it is probably the most well-known and recognizable symbol from Ancient Egypt
today. Fig. 5 is actually the Chi Rho symbol, which stands for Christ; it is taken from the first
two letters of the Greek spelling for Christ XPIΣTOΣ.

Fig. 5 Fig. 6

0:30:16/01:27:50—Here Veith shows yet again his naïveté in Egyptian mythology and history.
He shows a picture of Pope John Paul II, and calls him “the priest of Horus,” yet a picture of the
Egyptian god Osiris is up on the screen. Below is the screenshot Fig. 7.

Fig. 7
4
Strudwick, The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 161.

6
0:38:30/01:27:50 —Veith uses a quote about the Jesuits from the book The Brothers Karamazov
as if it is a fact from a reputable source. The Brothers Karamazov is a fictitious work written by
the novelist Fyodor Dostoyevsky in 1880.

0:44:50-55/01:27:50—Here Veith claims that the pagan god Jupiter is “the god of death.”
Jupiter was actually the Roman form of the Greek god Zeus, who was the king of the gods in the
Greek pantheon. Hades, Zeus’ brother, was the god of the dead/ruler of the underworld, and was
represented in Roman form as the god Dis Pater (or sometimes Pluto). Five seconds after this
Veith also claims that the Egyptian god Anubis is nothing but another form of the Egyptian god
Osiris, which is wholly untrue. “Represented as a dog, or as a man with a dog’s head, Anubis
was a god of the dead, closely associated with the process of mummification and embalming…
One of the most important of all the Ancient Egyptian gods, Osiris was associated with death,
resurrection and fertility.”5 While both these gods are associated with death, they are not one and
the same. Anubis was the guardian of the dead and was the god of mummification, while Osiris
was the ruler of the underworld and the embodiment of the Pharaoh when he died. These are two
separate gods in the Egyptian pantheon, and while they share some similarities and
responsibilities, it is entirely incorrect to say that they are the same god. The Egyptian pantheon
is one of the most complex in ancient pagan mythology and requires a great deal of historical
study to understand. Veith’s conclusions reveal a serious lack of knowledge and understanding in
pagan mythology.

So what is the point of showing this evidence? Indeed the question may be asked: Why

does a minister need to know anything about pagan mythology at all? The answer is, of course,

they do not. The problem here, however, is that Veith is using pagan mythology as the core

structure of his theories. Logic dictates that if his assumptions about pagan mythology are

incorrect and historically inaccurate, then his theories must follow suit. No one is denying that

pagan traditions have many times found their way into Christianity, but to base specific theories

on historical facts requires that those historical facts be accurate. The issue is Veith has never

been trained to discern historical fact from fiction. This makes his theories harmful to historical

context, and thus his teachings to be nothing more than inaccurate conspiracy theories.

5
Strudwick, The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, 104, 107.

7
 Conspiracy theories are extremely dangerous to Christians. They fill minds with fear for

whatever subject they contain. This fear often translates into hatred for that subject, and thus has

the ability to mentally and emotionally paralyze Christians in their ministry to non-Christians.

Veith predominantly singles out the Roman Catholic Church in his conspiracy theories. This

often breeds a great fear among his audiences, and produces a host of anti-Catholic rhetoric and

literature in the Seventh-day Adventist community. This is not only embarrassing for Adventists,

but also goes against the advice of one of the church’s founders, Ellen White (whose works

Veith strongly upholds), when she counseled on the work of evangelists:

But in regard to this line of work, I am instructed to say to our people: Be guarded. In bearing the
message, make no personal thrusts at other churches, not even the Roman Catholic Church.
Angels of God see in the different denominations many who can be reached only by the greatest
caution. Therefore let us be careful of our words. Let not our ministers follow their own impulses
in denouncing and exposing the “mysteries of iniquity.” Upon these themes silence is
eloquence.6

White is very clear about how Seventh-day Adventists should approach the Roman Catholic

Church. The focal point of Veith’s conspiracy theories, which are nothing more than personal

attacks, or as White would call them “thrusts,” is the Roman Catholic Church.

This is not to say that Seventh-day Adventists should not be wary of the theology of the

Roman Catholic Church, but it certainly should not attack the belief systems of fellow Christians

to the extent at which Veith does. This does nothing but alienate Catholics who would otherwise

be open to listening to our beliefs and be willing to discuss them. The secondary outgrowth from

fear is much more dangerous than hatred—isolationism. As the audiences of Veith listen to his

conspiracy theories on the Roman Catholic Church and its various organizations, an invisible

mental wall begins to develop between them and the “outside world,” which they now perceive

to be controlled by secret organizations. This effectively renders Christians unable to spread the

6
Ellen G. White, Evangelism (Maryland: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2002), 576.

8
word of God to others. Either they do not approach non-believers out of fear for their possible

connection to a conspiracy, or they approach the sinner not with the gospel of Christ but with the

knowledge of conspiracy theories.

This is the true danger of conspiracy theories: They do not allow us to follow the

commands that Christ gave us, and they convolute the simple and pure message of Christ’s love

and redemption for the sinner. The human mind desires simplicity because the world around us is

filled with confusion and falsehood. Christ commanded, “Go into all the world and preach the

good news to all creation” (Mark 16:15). It is the simple, saving message of the gospel that is

able to cut through the lies and darkness in the lives of sinners. It is the word of truth that shines

into the dark world of sin—simple and unaltered; a loving God who died for the redemption of

all sinners. When conspiracy theories distort this much-valued simplicity, the message of Christ

is lost in the convoluted muck of human error.

Austin E. Loignon holds a Ph.D. in History from the University of Texas at Arlington and
presently teaches at the same institution. He graduated from Southwestern Adventist University
in 2011 with a B.A. in history and a minor in religion. His dissertation traced the exchanges
between the health reform movements in Europe and North America with Dr. John Harvey
Kellogg as a conduit between them. His historical studies include Intercultural Transfer, Relics
and Pilgrimage in Medieval Europe, Witchcraft and Mass Hysteria, and Honor and Violence in
Early Modern and Renaissance Europe.

9
 Bibliography

Bonhoeffer, Dietrich. Reflections on the Bible: Human Word and Word of God. Edited by
Manfred Weber. Translated by M. Eugene Boring. Massachusetts: Hendrickson
Publishers, Inc., 2004.

Strudwick, Helen, ed. The Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt. London: Amber Books Ltd, 2006.

White, Ellen G. Evangelism. Maryland: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2002.

10