Globalism, Part 4: Unity and Religion

Why unite? The theory goes that the world is in a terrible time of destruction. Poverty is an enormous problem coupled with Aids. The chance for another great epidemic has skyrocketed since the rise of transportation efficiency. Issues facing the 21st Century world are: Over-population, global warming, wars, weapons of mass destruction, tyrannical dictators, imperialism (e.g. the USA), the energy crisis, terrorism, unfair trade, etc. Our world is getting increasingly smaller. What happens in one place effects another. Just look at the global economy. What happens in Asian markets effects ours while we’re still sleeping. The same goes for “global warming.” The earth is begging for us all to get on the same page. We can’t be national-centric anymore because what one country does effects all the others. This conclusion was adopted as early as the 1920s when our own President, in conjunction with British officials, proposed the League of Nations. (It actually could be traced back even further to Immanuel Kant, an extremely influential philosopher of the late 18th Century.)

Think about what the United Nations (hereafter, UN) is. It is the outworking of the failed “League of Nations.” The League of Nations was the idea of President Woodrow Wilson, yet our country didn’t want anything to do with it. We wanted to be isolationists. The League of Nations was created after WWI in attempt to “prevent” another world war. Likewise, the foundational purpose of the United Nations is to prevent war. Therefore, they promote peace. According to them, the uniting of nations is the only way to accomplish peace. We must come together in agreement. We don’t wipe out those we disagree with (e.g. Saddam Hussein). The UN doesn’t want mere national agreement. They want one nation by which there is no one left to disagree with.

Historically, religion has been a central issue in most wars. Religious wars are of the worst kind. They lead to genocide. They caused the Crusades (According to Pope Urban II’s speech in 1095 at the Council of Clermont, the Crusades WERE NOT just an aggressive action. They were also a re-action to Islamic aggression. Both religions were to blame. Remember, however, that before the Christians wanted to take those “Holy Lands,” during the Middle Ages, the Mohammedans (Muslims) took them in war in the 600s.) Religion is the cause of Islamic Terrorism in the world today. It is the cause of the Protestant vs. Catholic terrorism in Northern Ireland. If the UN can get us to unite our religions, then they think they can end war. “Unity” and “peace” replace “Father” and “Son.” (8) In a truly “tolerant” society, every idea is equal. That is the hallmark of post-modernity. Everybody has a piece of the truth, and we just put these pieces together to glean a mosaic of truth. Where things appear to contradict one another, we simply recognize that we don’t know everything, and we must believe that truly perfect knowledge would reveal harmony of ideas.

The NAM teaches that there is no one way to God. God is bigger than a single religion. He or she is transcendent of that. Religion is merely the manifestation of individual cultures. It is the way communities express devotion to higher-ness. No religion is “wrong” because all express through their own relative experience. Therefore, one can learn from all religions.

Remember at this point, however, that they want to move beyond our present state. What does that mean? Presently, we live in a world that fights wars over religious differences. If we can all come to the realization that we’re just manifesting cultural differences, then maybe we can all just get along. After all, God is god whether he or she is called Yahweh, Jesus, The Triune God, Buddha, Allah, Baal, Ishtar, The ONE, Nature, Zeus, Sophia, or Goddess. If we can unite on this and also unite on morality, then we can move the world into greater peace, joy, and love. It has long since been believed that atheists have no moral code since they have no religion to base it on. Ask any atheist if they believe in morality, and they will tell you that they do. It’s based not on religion but on philosophy (i.e. on Plato, Aristotle, Levinas, Camus, etc.). So not even atheists are left out of this attempt to unite. God, for them, is replaced with “Good.” Atheism wants to demote religion because religion is the cause of war, division, misunderstandings/“poor understanding,” etc. However, they can philosophically agree believe in the "ethics" of the UN's goals.

Globalism, Part 3: Immigration & Environmentalism

Let’s consider the immigration issue in the US. Why would a President who makes his entire foreign policy about terrorism leave our own borders wide open? He is one of the few Republicans who favors allowing illegal aliens in for the purpose of cheap labor. He was for the Dubai ports deal. How did the major empires of history accomplish what they did? Slavery. They found the cheapest labor possible and forced them to do government sponsored work. They forced their conquered to join their military or work toward the cause. If terrorism is the number one threat to US security, then shouldn’t politicians be worried about open borders? Republicans want cheap labor; democrats want votes. The US has already taken steps toward “free trade.” Free trade is an economic tool that profits member nations. It is the first step to the unification of countries. It is exactly what the European nations agreed to a few years before they decided to become the European Union (EU). The US is considering uniting with Canada and Mexico much like the European Union nations did. It would be a “North-American Union” (NAU). Now consider the issue of illegal immigration under this light. Cheap trade and labor comes out of such a union. Now do you wonder why we can’t get a fence built down there despite the majority of Americans wanting it?

Hey, how about a NAU superhighway! Sounds Great! Take a look!


More on the NAU.


How about the "Amero" as our currency...what? Haven't heard of it? Oh, by the way, it's already in the works.



Look at our culture. What is valued? Tolerance…political correctness…the environment. Why the environment? This whole “global warming issue” is truly a “global” issue. If it is true that humans are really CAUSING these problems and disaster is around the corner, then the whole world has to do something about it. See that? Global climate change is nothing more than global propaganda. If we allow global laws (Kiyoto Treaty) to rule over sovereignty, then we’ve taken yet another step into a worldwide government. World government only exists when nations transfer their power to another. Environmentalism stirs at the heartstrings of so many people for good reason, but it is a tool of the globalists. It makes us think in terms of internationalism. We cannot be isolationists if everything we do effects others. It also sets a precedent for other countries to have a say-so in what we do. It can unite other countries against us because “the US is causing flooding in England.” It’s about global socialism. In the 1970s, reports came out that the environment was cooling. We were on the verge of another Ice-age. The US is blamed for everything already; why not go ahead and blame us for global warming. Did you know the infamous Kiyoto Treaty did not include developing countries such as China and India? That is nearly half the world’s population! It’s not about the environment; it’s about control. Offsetting climate change is extremely expensive and yields little profit. These “scientists” who keep putting out these dire reports are UN sponsored scientists. The special reports we always hear about are from the UN. Hmmm…the UN wouldn’t have anything to gain from global climate change would they?

Globalism, Part 2: The WCC & Information Control

I haven’t made up my mind (because I just don’t know enough about them), but the WCC or the World Council of Churches scare me. They’re basically the largest ecumenical movement in the world. Ecumenical comes from the Greek word “oikoumene” which means “all in one house.” It is an attempt to unite the church somewhat like it used to be prior to the Protestant Reformation. Oh yeah, seems like a good idea. Let’s go back to the corruption of the historical Roman Catholic Church. Let’s go back to the Church which strayed away from its foundation in Christ for the sake of money and power. The difference that the new unified church would bring is autonomy within unity. We would be unified within diversity remember? This means we hold to basic truths while allowing all kinds of religious groups in. We unite with other religions based on our mutual beliefs. What do we agree with them on? Well, we all believe first and foremost in a “god.” Secondly, we all believe in peace. Go to the WCC website and see how much of their page is about unification around the central doctrine of peace. It’s not that peace is a bad thing, but this peace is deceptive. We don’t want peace at any cost. We don’t want peace at the cost of accepting false religion as valid and true. We don’t want the end of freedoms. You’re a “terrorist” if you don’t want peace right? Well, then you’re a terrorist if you’re not for public security cameras. You’re a terrorist if you want to uphold the 2nd Amendment right to own guns. You’re a terrorist if you don’t allow yourself to be implanted with a tracking device (in the future)? What do you have to hide that you can’t be filmed and tracked?

Let’s talk about this issue of tracking devices. Digital Angel Corporation of Minnesota has already begun production of small RFID microchips that can be implanted in animals and humans. The implant is larger than a grain of rice but smaller than a dime (some RFID tags are the size of powder). The marketing of this technology is innocent enough. It allows pet owners to find their pets in disasters such as Katrina or when Fluffy simply “gets out.” It can be used by farmers to help track disease. It has been implemented in the military realm already via transponders for pilots who eject. Why spend millions to build a fence across the US when you can just implant people? Some may wonder, “Well, not everyone will go for implanting.” They will if they can’t buy anything without it. They will if they can’t go anywhere in the public realm without it. No usage of planes, taxis, no ability to buy food, cars, gas, etc. Tracking systems would give the ability to do things unimaginable. Purchasing items at Wal-Mart would require you to stuff your buggy, then simply walk out. You’re account could automatically be billed. Tired of all those login/password requirements online? Those would become a memory. Identity theft could be eliminated. Alibis would be a thing of the past. The local police office would know exactly where you were at the time of the crime. At least, they could say you were “there.” Why not track people, this would do so much to fight crime. Don’t you want to know where your abducted child is? Aren’t you for peace? Don’t you want to live without crime? Well, if you don’t, then I suspect you must want to carry out crime. You must be a terrorist. Obviously, my point is that this gives a centralized government a vast amount of power. What happens when Christianity, in the “fundamental” form, becomes outlawed? What happens when a pastor wants to say something against homosexuality based on biblical arguments, but he is fined for his “hate speech”?

(Let me make a brief statement about the WCC. The WCC may be a perfectly fine organization. They visited Lee a couple years ago for a meeting. I don’t know enough about them to say one way or the other. However, their goal seems a little troubling to me. It is the division of “truth” that allows choice. It is the division of power that avoids tyranny and religious dictatorship. "Uniting" isn't without its own problems.)

(Regarding the tracking devices, another company even has “powder-sized” RFID tags out now.)

Globalism, Part 1: A brief overview of the NWO and the NAM

There is a difference between the NWO and the New Age Movement (hereafter, NAM). The NWO is a political term. It is the global unification of the world. Basically, it is a one-world government. This means a unification of laws, trade, rights, authority, etc. The NAM is much more spiritual. It is, in a sense, the religious division of the NWO. Both movements are about unity, but one is physical and one is spiritual. It is imperative to understand that there is a difference yet, more importantly, a unity between the two.

In an address to the nation, George Bush Sr. announced that all the issues facing the world required a “New World Order.” We need this to help with issues such as famine, natural disasters, global warming, nuclear holocaust, genocide, WW3, terrorism—essentially, peace. Peace is the new God. I’m sure you’ve heard the phrase “unity within diversity.” This slogan of tolerance is the sime qua nom (“not without which,” meaning it is the foundation) of the NWO. “If we can just unite everyone around a single goal, then we can accomplish anything.” According to this movement, humanity wants peace and if you don’t follow their narrow requirements for peace, then you’re a terrorist. Every religion is supposed to unite under this banner of peace to pray. All religions are equal, and all pray to the same God. We just manifest, due to culture, differing ways. These different ways are to be celebrated because this is “unity within diversity.” Pope John Paul II called for “New International Order”. Pope Benedict called for the NWO as well. He is quoted to say, “A united humanity will be able to confront the many troubling problems of the present time: from the menace of terrorism to the humiliating poverty in which millions of human beings live, from the proliferation of weapons to the pandemics and the environmental destruction which threatens the future of our planet.” [I wrote this part about 3 or 4 weeks ago and the link for where I got this quote (yahoo news) has been changed. So sorry, I just used a quote that I can no longer cite. Good thing this isn't a paper!]

Globalism, Introduction

Growing up, I was told that the future wasn’t going to bright for the earth. I would be fine because I would “go in the rapture.” This, of course, led to the moments in my life where I thought I had been “left behind.” Such an evil little eleven-year-old, I was. The left-behind world was going to unite under a single leader who would head up the New World Order, which would be evil incarnate. Eventually, I grew up and left those “strange, fundamentalist” views behind. I became “educated” in the truth of the matter. I learned about the “amillennialist” view that basically the book of Revelation was just telling us that God would ultimately overcome. After all, for generations people have believed that they were the “final generation.” God was coming back in their lifetime, and their proof was the “obvious signs.” This is why, even though I did believe in the rapture, I didn’t believe it would happen in my time (by the time I got to college).

Leaving the issue of the rapture behind, I want to talk about another part of this whole interpretation of Revelation. That is, the New World Order. No this term isn’t in the Bible, but neither is “rapture” or “Trinity.” Do I need to stop here and let that sink in? The question is whether or not the concept of the New World Order (hereafter, NWO) is biblical. At the risk of coming across as a fanatical fundamentalist, I think it is present. To me, the question isn’t whether or not the NWO is coming; its whether or not it has any significance to the events in the book of Revelation. I think we as a world aren’t far off (by this I mean within 25-75 years) from this NWO.

Okay, at this point let me say this. This is a theory. I’ll try to give you truths, but the reality is that these truths are just dots in a sky. You have to trace the outline to make sense of it all. One has to connect the dots to come to the conclusion that there really is a NWO coming. I don’t know there is. I’m not saying this will happen. What I’m saying is that some of the things I’ve read and seen scare me. This subject will require many posts so if you're going to take the red pill, then follow it to its ultimate conclusion before you make any judgments.

Let me tell you how this started. I’ve been doing a class on the Church of God’s Declaration of Faith. The final two points (of the 14) are about eschatology (the end times). I’ve been doing a lot of research on the issue because I didn’t receive much education on the issue at Lee. I came across a lot of compelling information for the Preterist viewpoint, which basically claims that Revelation isn’t futuristic but a past event. In this framework, "John" is just saying that Christians will prevail over the evil Roman Empire and their persecuting Emperors like Nero (who is “the beast”). Well, while looking up stuff on that, I also found out a lot about globalization or the New World Order and the related “The New Age Movement.” I’m going to say some things below that I will try to back up with sources. (I used wikipedia as a source, but I made sure it wasn’t just garbage by double checking it and by using my own knowledge of the subject matter. I used wikipedia because it tends to pull a lot of information together into one spot—itself.)

Believe me, the rest will be a lot more interesting than this was, but this was necessary to explain why I got here and where I intend to go.


Next:
Part 1 will cover the purpose of the New World Order (globalization) and its religious connections.