New World Order, Socialism Vs. Grace

[Guest end3]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

 

So initially, I was thinking that grace did not support his message, but also was thinking that the only unification would be a result of belief in one God, whatever that might be defined as.

 

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

[florduh]

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

I doubt it's achievable with or without a god belief. The Christian god can't even keep his own churches from fighting with each other!

 

I guess separate nations promote war, and there are supposedly 'no atheists in foxholes'. Traditionally, when times are tough people want some supernatural help. There can be no peace as long as nationalism exists.

[Ouroboros]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

It was a flop when Christianity was tried to unify people too. Just look at the time before the Renaissance. It was one reason why America's constitution was made secular.

 

So initially, I was thinking that grace did not support his message, but also was thinking that the only unification would be a result of belief in one God, whatever that might be defined as.

That was the idea behind Moses and Judaism. And it was the idea behind the Catholic Church. And Mohammad. And ...

 

It doesn't work either.

 

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

I don't think it's achievable either. And also, everyone has a different perspective of what "God" is, so to reach for "God" is to reach for one's own ideas of what "God" is.

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

It was enough for me to see that the United Federation of Planets couldn't get it together either. Those Romulans were undermining EVERYTHING, just because they could....

 

Okay, I know this is the Lion's Den, so now my more serious look at this.

 

I DON'T think it is entirely impossible for a new world order. Religion would definitely NOT be a unifying factor. I think it would have to be along a bigger standard of the greater good of man. BUT, with this said, there wouldn't be ONE government. I think it would have to be something where everyone agrees to certain GLOBAL rules, but on a national level, well, that is left a little more free to choose. I don't see countries giving up their sovereignty. I think they would have to take a realistic mindset that corruption WILL happen, but it is possible to recover and keep moving forward. But the most important of all would that governing be completely secular, human rights would have to be equal, and class caste systems banned.

 

I read wayyyyy too much science fiction, but I've seen a lot of that fiction become reality...except on the societal level...thus far...

 

Never say never, right?

[Guest end3]

Well, you look at the thing as a whole. We all seem to want the successful or complete something in our lives. Marketing sure appears to appeal to this. Products are geared towards making people successful in their endeavors......gardening, cosmetics, dieting, self-help.......start "here" and you will become sucessfull "there"......a one stop shop. And the products today are geared such that we can do this with little effort.

 

I think this is the same for the bigger "life" picture as well. You know, ramp it up to a product that makes "everyone" successful within a lifetime scenario....this process, that process......this religion, that religion.....this education, that....these views, those..

 

Just rambling here, but I am thinking the laws themselves don't change, but the matter within the scenario changes. For example, feeding or healing 100 people doesn't change basic law of people needing to eat or get healed ......but feeding and healing 1000 makes a radical difference.

 

And then you throw in morality. Nature allows for balance without much morality, but I don't see that humans are capable of allowing this.

 

So, in my mind, one possibility exists atm, the ramping up of the education of the law itself, not a physcal law, but a moral law through education.....

[Guest end3]

So one would have to think that the superpowers would have to be somewhat sacrificial rather than isolationists, and manage wisdom at the same time.

[TheBluegrassSkeptic]

So one would have to think that the superpowers would have to be somewhat sacrificial rather than isolationists, and manage wisdom at the same time.

Ironically, I have always envisioned my leaders doing just that, though I doubt I will live to see the day when they do....

[NeverAgainV]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

It was a flop when Christianity was tried to unify people too. Just look at the time before the Renaissance. It was one reason why America's constitution was made secular.

 

 

EXACTLY I was thinking the same thing, christianity has completely flopped when it comes to "unity", All I can say is that preacher guys sounds just like xpastard...completely ignorant of christian history & christianity presently.

 

The New World Order I think is a good idea...but I don't see it happening with all of the cruelty that man inflicts on mankind. Too many power crazed nuts to allow peace a chance...but I do hope at least

society/ mankind will become more enlightened.

[Will02]

Christians have been talking about this "New World Order" for nearly 30 years now. It never happened. Conspiracy websites are full of people who still think that there's a cabal of elitists (including *gasp* THE ILLUMINATI and THE ANTICHRIST!!!!!) who are always scheming and plotting to enslave the rest of us. If there is such a conspiracy, keeping it quiet would be nearly impossible if a large number of people were involved; leaks would be inevitable and there would be repercussions. People don't like being blatantly controlled and any such group of would-be dictators would find themselves in the crosshairs of a much larger group of very pissed off people in such a scenario.

 

There's lots of practical problems with implementing a NWO: Why would anyone want to deliberately turn the world into a dystopic shithole? What would that accomplish? Running a single country is hard, micromanaging the entire world would be impossible. Even if implemented, such a society would be inherently unstable from the start. Are the "elitists" such dicks that they would deliberately inflict chaos on the world just for the hell of it? How in the hell would such people get into a position of leadership in the first place? The whole NWO scenario just seems really petty and shortsighted.

[pratt]

god cannot even convince 2 couple and a snake to work together in the beautiful garden f eden,

 

god cannot even get his act together with his consort of angels in heaven,,,,

 

and you expects a new world order, with or without god with b billion population and legions of demns lurking around, including the exCers?

 

 

[Guest wester]

As usual, your preacher is touting status quo bias.

 

The current status quo or "order" world wide is based on coercion, inequality, intimidation, fear, violence and domination.

All of which are total horse sh*t. If you ask 90% of the people in the world, the entire system and edifice should be altered or abolished. Ask a Cambodian farmer about the benefits or rightness of whatever world order in which Cambodians have to scrape by on less than $2 per day and he would probably call your preacher totally blinkered and full of **it.

[Guest end3]

I think it behooves the more developed countries to foresee the develpmental issues of the less developed countries from a sacrificial mode.

 

I would think "freedom" through representation would be a good thing, but somehow we appear to be moving away from that......primarily the need to make things equal within a given group of people.

 

So it looks like we have morality moving in where it doesn't belong rather than letting nature create a balance of the strongest surviving. No revelation here I gather. The strongest surviving hasn't worked with humanity either.

 

So what I am seeing is there might be a number or size of group that is capable of enough cooperation, sacrifice, that works well enough that allows for decent freedom.

[midniterider]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

 

So initially, I was thinking that grace did not support his message, but also was thinking that the only unification would be a result of belief in one God, whatever that might be defined as.

 

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

 

I know when I wake up in the morning I ask myself, "What can I do to help my fellow world citizens achieve a new world order." :-) You're right, it isnt achievable. People would have to agree on something and that aint gonna happen. People love war and will never be unified.

[Destinyjesus3000]

i dont know all the details so not sayig its part of the NW but its interesting, but i theres a bit of info on it on google about how the North American Union was formed without constitutional consent and they are making new types of money and Canada is thinking of getting rid of the penny lol, but thats another issue because the amount it costs to make the penny is more than the penny itself now.

[LivingLife]

The conspiracy and NWO woo is merely a deflection to get the faithfools eyes of what really is happening in the church. It is a useful scare tactic and anyone w/o a modicum of international political knowledge will buy into the great conspiracy.

 

It is no more a talking/focus point than abortion and gays are talking points foe the woos. Christianity has nothing of substance to offer so making everyone seem like your enemy is just a ploy perpetuated through the centuries and people are coerced into the group think.

 

In a way, all churches are like little unions where folk can feel protected and special and ignore the fact we all get screwed over one way or another. Little has changed since the aristocracy and royalty, just new titles and no king to bow to.

[Guest end3]

The conspiracy and NWO woo is merely a deflection to get the faithfools eyes of what really is happening in the church. It is a useful scare tactic and anyone w/o a modicum of international political knowledge will buy into the great conspiracy.

 

It is no more a talking/focus point than abortion and gays are talking points foe the woos. Christianity has nothing of substance to offer so making everyone seem like your enemy is just a ploy perpetuated through the centuries and people are coerced into the group think.

 

In a way, all churches are like little unions where folk can feel protected and special and ignore the fact we all get screwed over one way or another. Little has changed since the aristocracy and royalty, just new titles and no king to bow to.

 

I assume you have a solution?

[LivingLife]

If I had a solution that worked, folk would worship me. Sadly Fortunately I do not have a messiah complex

[Guest end3]

If I had a solution that worked, folk would worship me. Sadly Fortunately I do not have a messiah complex

 

Just to play devil's advocate here.....or Christ's advocate.....what would be wrong with "love your neighbor". If this were accomplished, would it not take care of the situation?

[Ouroboros]

Just to play devil's advocate here.....or Christ's advocate.....what would be wrong with "love your neighbor". If this were accomplished, would it not take care of the situation?

Oh, you mean "A man should not hate any living creature. Let him be friendly and compassionate to all." (Bhagavad-Gita)

 

Or did you mean "The (proper) punishment to those who have done evil (to you), is to put them to shame by showing them kindness, in return and to forget both the evil and the good done on both sides." (Tagizhagam)

 

Both of them most likely predates Christianity...

 

End3, read the Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Rule, and particularly check all the BCE quotes.

[riddick]

I would love to see the world come together as one, for a common goal, but a lot has to change, religion, petty differences, hunger, war, etc etc all gone. But I don't think we'll see happening that for a long time yet.

 

When my Christian friends would talk about the illuminati, the only thing missing was a tin foil hat sitting on top of their heads.

 

Or we could just worship livinglife :-)

[bornagainathiest]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

 

So initially, I was thinking that grace did not support his message, but also was thinking that the only unification would be a result of belief in one God, whatever that might be defined as.

 

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

 

Ok End,

 

I'm kinda curious about the initial premise of this thread.

So let me see if I can sum up what the preacher said and work thru it's implications.

 

He cited the tower of Babel as a worked, historical example of how God separates people into different nations.

God divides people like this to prevent world unity, because such a state of peace and global harmony is not good.

This is because happy people, living in a stable, peaceful and harmonious world-culture, won't feel the need to reach out to God.

Whereas, unhappy people, suffering in a divided, fearful and warring world of many nations will feel the need to reach out to God.

 

Is that about right?

 

BAA.

[LivingLife]

Is that about right?

Well, misery seeks its own company so yeah, you 'bout summed it up right.

[Guest end3]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

 

So initially, I was thinking that grace did not support his message, but also was thinking that the only unification would be a result of belief in one God, whatever that might be defined as.

 

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

 

Ok End,

 

I'm kinda curious about the initial premise of this thread.

So let me see if I can sum up what the preacher said and work thru it's implications.

 

He cited the tower of Babel as a worked, historical example of how God separates people into different nations.

God divides people like this to prevent world unity, because such a state of peace and global harmony is not good.

This is because happy people, living in a stable, peaceful and harmonious world-culture, won't feel the need to reach out to God.

Whereas, unhappy people, suffering in a divided, fearful and warring world of many nations will feel the need to reach out to God.

 

Is that about right?

 

BAA.

 

Think you about nailed it BAA. Thoughts, need I ask?

[bornagainathiest]

Think you about nailed it BAA. Thoughts, need I ask?

 

My thoughts?

 

Any argument based upon false premises can only yield false conclusions.

 

How's that?

The falsity of the premise?

How many falsehoods would you like?

Three for starters? (lmk if you want some more.)

 

1.

The Babel event never actually happened.

Modern humans (Homo Sapiens) have inhabited every continent except Antarctica for 10's of thousands of years and in the case of Africa, for over 100,000 years. There never was a common language for all humanity. There may be one in the future, but there never was one, within the last 6 -10 thousand years. Archaelogical records will bear this out, but I assume you'll just chose to deny them. C'est la vie!

 

2.

The major, global event (the Flood) preceding Babel never happened.

So there was never anything to cause the human race to begin again from just one location. In this case, Mount Ararat.

Geology will bear out that there was no global Flood. But why should you take any notice of this checked, cross-checked, double-checked, independently-verified and peer-reviewed information?

 

3.

Everyone living today is descended from the impossibly small gene pool of just eight ( 8 ) survivors of the Flood.

Well, not exactly. Everyone living today is descended from just one female, who lived about 200,00 years ago. She is the Mitochondrial Eve. http://en.wikipedia....tochondrial_Eve But, hey! This is just science End. Why should you start to paying any attention to it now?

 

 

So, treating a fictional event as a real one is a false basis for Mr. Preacher's argument... and therefore your's too.

 

BAA.

[Ouroboros]

Listening to a radio preacher last night............he was saying that man's own attempt at new world order, i.e. a theoretically unified world at peace, was not good and cited the tower of Babel story, that God separates into nations so that man will reach for God. And then he went on to say that the example of the United Nations (UN) also points to when man attempts this, it's a flop.

 

So initially, I was thinking that grace did not support his message, but also was thinking that the only unification would be a result of belief in one God, whatever that might be defined as.

In other words, only a holy war, led by a Christian emperor, can lead to the True Peace™ under Christian rulership. But only after all heathens, atheist, non-Christians (= Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists...) are killed or converted. Glory!

 

Obviously the world is pushing towards a new world order, and from a heartfelt grace perspective I think......and I don't know that this is wrong, but from a realistic perspective, I don't think it is achievable. Also, I am unclear how separate nations would incite people to reach for God.

I don't think it's achievable either.