thunderbolt Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Interview with Ford Vox in the Seattle Times. (BTW – I am registered on their forms.) Universism is the latest buzzword in the media, and a “end times” sign with evangelicals. While they have many philosophies and ideas that would be shared by many on this board, I wonder about the whole “religion” aspect of it. I am a fan of the work of Jacques Ellul, and read his books on propaganda and the formation and sustainability of all institutions – be it government or religion. In short, all institutions is headed one way, and it’s not up. I have not made up my mind about this “movement” yet, and I have a number of unanswered questions. While the idea to rework religion from within is a great concept, I just wonder what would be the end result of this “religion?” Haven't we tried this before just to end up with another religion? Would it be any different in than any other movement that starts with noble idea of “freeing” people from contemporary oppressive paradigms? Also, the opinions seem so diverse that I don’t know how this will make a coherent “religion” at all. The coherent religion of knowing nothing? I get their goals, I just don't get the "relgion" part. What are you making of this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 What are you making of this?In a few years people will be coerced into accepting a single world order. To handle the spiritualist's role in this, the religions must conform to the concepts driving it. To get everyone weak and desperate enough for them to accept the idea that it is good, all else must be brought down and confused. "We must replace these religions, because look at all of the confusion within them. And it is really causing a lot of harm to the innocent." The problem is that the higher concepts, thus far, have not shown that they are the "right" concepts. If they aren’t then there is hell to pay because the second best method for governing a population is one of constant false hopes, conflict, and strife but locks the governance into being free from any and every enemy but Reality itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 My dad is a conspiracy believing in a New World Order, is that your belief too?Well, try not to confuse my opinion with any attitude. The pattern of Man reveals that a single world order is inevitable regardless of any conspiracies. But, as pointed out on a different thread, governing a large population requires deceptive and coercive methods until that one method which can finally be totally open and honest. But I have seen no signs that Man understands this one method - that is what is being "left out" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Do you believe these coercive methods to gain acceptance will be that done by physical means?Very few. Most are mental and emotional trickery. Many are financial and legalistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 In a few years people will be coerced into accepting a single world order. Based on what evidence do you make this claim? If this pipe dream hasn't worked out in all of religious history, why would it be any different for your imagined scenario? I think you overlooked on slight detail in your hypothesis - that man is a free moral agent. LOL...no offense Educk but being that I am a Seinfeld fan, I find your comment (bolded) hysterical. No offense taken, and glad you enjoyed it. That's what it sounds like to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think you overlooked on slight detail in your hypothesis - that man is a free moral agent. Nice sounding words. Have any idea what that actually means? Free from what? - Reality? - The governments? - Parents? - Religions? You might want to test your "pipe dream" of consequence freedom sometime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 My dad is a conspiracy believing in a New World Order, is that your belief too?Well, try not to confuse my opinion with any attitude. The pattern of Man reveals that a single world order is inevitable regardless of any conspiracies. I've come to realize this on my own. This pattern of man, that is. But, as pointed out on a different thread, governing a large population requires deceptive and coercive methods until that one method which can finally be totally open and honest. Isn't this just the hope in a concept that has been floating around in the minds of people since the recognition of the "pattern"? But I have seen no signs that Man understands this one method - that is what is being "left out" I disagree that it is something that is being "left out". I see it was being one of those illusive unreachable goals. The New World Order is a rather OLD concept, is it not? I mean, it is necessary in order to form the "pattern", but something always happens that keeps it from coming to it's fruition. (wars, corruption, civil unrest, etc...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 The New World Order is a rather OLD concept, is it not? I mean, it is necessary in order to form the "pattern", but something always happens that keeps it from coming to it's fruition. (wars, corruption, civil unrest, etc...)What has been keeping it from being forced into a reality has been the freedom to expand, but guess what. And I ONLY believe in that illusive hope in the honest method because I found it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 The New World Order is a rather OLD concept, is it not? I mean, it is necessary in order to form the "pattern", but something always happens that keeps it from coming to it's fruition. (wars, corruption, civil unrest, etc...)What has been keeping it from being forced into a reality has been the freedom to expand, but guess what. I give up -- what? And I ONLY believe in that illusive hope in the honest method because I found it. Did you actually find it, or did you just follow the same pattern of thought that has enabled such a concept to develop within the minds of others who believe the same way? Also, if I'm reading your reply properly, you are aware that such a hope is in fact illusive, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I give up -- what? Room to expand has run out. The walls of Earth now require that Man build up, not out. In the past he has always been able to find hope by moving away and starting over. He can't do that anymore. Did you actually find it, or did you just follow the same pattern of thought that has enabled such a concept to develop within the minds of others who believe the same way? Also, if I'm reading your reply properly, you are aware that such a hope is in fact illusive, correct?It's possible to be wrong of course, but I have seen no evidence at all of any knowledge of exactly what I "found". It is in line with, but not directly a part of the Jesus' concepts. This is why I would prefer that the man be understood. It has been illusive because to realize it requires the understanding of exactly what makes up intelligence, where all emotion comes from in exact detail (not vague spiritualistic concepts), and exactly why life is what it is. This topic has only been recently realized by science. So, yes, I added to the concepts that science and religions had already professed, but I'm not claiming to be the original source of all wisdom, merely someone who went to the trouble of looking for what wasn't already said. Such things are always found on top of someone else's mountain or mountains. My confidence comes from the intensity with which I searched for any possible error in my thoughts on the subject. I can’t imagine a question that I haven’t already asked myself and rechecked the validity of the answer very many times. I still watch for any sign of possible error and expect to always watch for such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I give up -- what? Room to expand has run out. The walls of Earth now require that Man build up, not out. In the past he has always been able to find hope by moving away and starting over. He can't do that anymore. There's always (in my best William Shatner voice) "Space - the final frontier. These are the voyages of the..." You get the picture. You can't build much higher than that. The rest of your post... Understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 You get the picture. Oh, I get the picture, but... Have you seen the film "Waterworld"? That more accurately depicts our real world (in a allegory sense). It would be nice to wait for social space travel, but the reality is that you have about 5-7 years to get out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 I think you overlooked on slight detail in your hypothesis - that man is a free moral agent. Nice sounding words. Have any idea what that actually means? Free from what? - Reality? - The governments? - Parents? - Religions? You might want to test your "pipe dream" of consequence freedom sometime. Please don't insult me by answering my question with a question. What is the basis and evidence for your hypothesis? I'll debunk your other nonsense after you answer me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ssel Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 What are you making of this?This was your question. I answered it. I won't "insult" you any further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fweethawt Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 It would be nice to wait for social space travel, but the reality is that you have about 5-7 years to get out there. You wouldn't happen to be basing this comment on what you've read about the Mayan calendar stuff, would you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted January 8, 2006 Author Share Posted January 8, 2006 What are you making of this?This was your question. I answered it. I won't "insult" you any further. Now you are further insulting my intelligence by confusing the question in question. You know damn well which question it was - the one about a "one world religion.” So, spit it out - hard evidence! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueGiant Posted January 10, 2006 Share Posted January 10, 2006 There are some people who, no matter what, are going to keep their own path, their own ways. Not sure why it should be a religion either, I guess it is just a nice thing for people who want the cocoon or the coolness of a religious label. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thunderbolt Posted January 11, 2006 Author Share Posted January 11, 2006 Hey Blue! I concur, and thanks for everyone's feedback. I think after having being labelled with an "ian" I don't really care for any "ism" or being any "ian" or "ist." Heck, it's enough to be just me without need for labels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts