ECO WORSHIP

April 23, 2009

Dear friends,

There are some articles I just have to include ALL of. They are too important to miss. This article is one of those.

It is a “culture and society” article out of LA, but if you think this is an isolated California philosophy you would be wrong. These heretical and completely anti-CHRIST ideas were pumped down my throat in college in tiny Demorest, GA. In my own little town of Dahlonega it is rampant, with community courses at our local state college more about eco-Worship than solid education. There are numerous holistic health centers with lots of transcendental meditation and mind/body/spirit energy techniques and a local shop or two that are nothing short of witchcraft.

I don’t know if many of you older folks (okay not to offend, but I’m a Gen-X’r) know just how widely this is accepted and embraced by the majority of the developed world. It trully has overtaken world thought, thanks to the Enemy, and the neo-pantheism of the New Age movement. I urge you to read the WHOLE article and see where “religion” is going. It is no longer a crutch of the weak minded, or opiate of the masses, as it was in the days of materialist modernism. We are a post-modern, multicultural globalists culture now! We can’t “offend” anyone else’s relgion or alienate anyone else’s culture. Besides Oprah believes in it and Jonathan Edwards Cross Country is talking to dead relatives, so who wouldn’t believe it.

The New Age takeover can and will “transform” and synthesize the world’s religions into a global collective of self, animal, plant, water, element, energy, and cosmic worship. How convenient for the enemy to have such a revival of ancient paganism (see it quoted in article below) just before Christ’s Second Coming.

Please, please read this article carefully, and look out for its proponents in your town, college, workplace, and TV screen! RESIST the Devil and HE will FLEE FROM YOU! Not the other way around. We cannot FLEE him, but we certainly can resist!

Love in Christ,

Corwin

P.S. Also note that the main commentator in this article – Bron Taylor – seems to be prophesying future catastrophic “natural” events! See below…These events certainly will happen, but they are a direct result of God’s predetermined plan for this planet and are entirely in HIS capable Hands. Just realize what the global eco-worhsipers will do when these events occur. They will overthrow the true God (and all gods that ever “existed” before) and replace Him with an evil and false human messiah: the World Teacher, the Imam Mahdi, the Fifth Buddha, Krishna, ANTICHRIST.

A New Genesis: Getting World Religions to Worship Ecologically

The world’s various religious traditions may speak of respect for and stewardship of nature, but the current ecological plight suggests the message may need some reinforcement as it moves from pulpit to pew.

In 1967, historian Lynn White wrote an influential essay in which he argued religion — and Christianity in particular — bore fundamental responsibility for the sad state of the natural environment. Christianity, he wrote, “insisted that it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends” — a mission that humans have enthusiastically carried out over the centuries with ever-increasing technical sophistication.

“Since the roots of our trouble are so largely religious,” White concluded, “the remedy must also be essentially religious, whether we call it that or not.”

Forty-two years later, many prominent spiritual leaders — including the current pope and his predecessor — have taken up White’s challenge, forcefully declaring that protecting the environment is a moral issue. But in spite of their pronouncements, the state of the environment seems even more perilous, with ecologists warning of decreasing biodiversity and the potentially catastrophic consequences of climate change. Living green may now be part of official doctrine, but the message hasn’t quite made it from the pulpit to the pew.

So are the world’s religious traditions — which define and shape the fundamental mythologies humans live by — a help or a hindrance in the fight to save the Earth? Two prominent scholars, who have studied the subject in depth, have different views. John Grim, co-coordinator of Yale University’s Forum on Religion and Ecology, is optimistic. Bron Taylor, editor of the Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature and a professor of environmental studies at the University of Florida, is considerably less so.

“Individuals who have been working with environmental issues for decades — both scientists and those working at it from a policy angle — are asking why we haven’t seen a transformation in the larger populace,” Grim said. “Although people identify themselves as environmentally concerned, this often doesn’t show up (in changed behavior such as) reduced consumption or energy use. Some deeper motivation is needed to make the turn. Religions can play a role in terms of this transformation of consciousness.

“There is reason to believe that religion is a significant and negative variable contributing to the degradation of ecosystems globally,” said Taylor. “I’m as yet unconvinced that these traditions can be changed enough, and rapidly enough, to ameliorate the current rapid decline in the genetic and species variety of the planet.”

The underlying issue was probably best defined by poet and essayist Robert Bly, who has been writing about man’s ravenous relationship with the environment for decades. “We’re still living a mythology of abundance,” he said in a recent interview. “Now it turns out we have found out the limits of the world’s resources, so we need a different mythology — a mythology of preservation.

That will require the major faith traditions to shift their focus, at least in part, from the hereafter to the here-and-now. ***The notion that man is uniquely made in God’s image and thus set apart from nature will have to be abandoned. For all its disputes with Darwinism, religion will have to evolve.***

Grim has devoted much of his life to facilitating that process. Along with his wife, fellow Yale scholar Mary Evelyn Tucker, he organized a series of 10 conferences on religion and ecology in the late 1990s, later publishing the resulting papers in a series of books. Last year, the couple traveled to China, where they laid the framework for doing similar work in that rapidly developing (and extremely polluted) nation.

“We had conversations with Pan Yue, China’s vice minister for the environment,” Grim said. “He put it to us this way: ‘We have the environmental laws on the books, but we’re not able to enforce them because there is no environmental culture in China.’ He sees that it’s not going to be possible to bring in an ethics from the West. It needs to come out of the local soil. The seeds are there.”

Taylor isn’t so sure. “The greening of religion is much more pronounced in the Western world than in Asia, despite the stereotypes of some that Buddhism or Taoism are innately environmentally friendly,” he said. “There is no evidence of that.”

In contrast, Taylor notes there is a long-standing tradition in the Western faiths that man should be good stewards of the earth. (Think of St. Francis of Assisi.) “There are biblical passages that do express delight and wonder at nature,” he said. “So the interesting question is why this has so seldom animated participants in these religions.”

Part of Grim’s mission has been to tease out those eco-friendly biblical verses — and similar passages from other sacred texts —and find ways to apply them to today’s reality. He cites three examples of progress in aligning spiritual with ecological impulses:

• The Ecumenical Patriarch, Bartholomew, of the Greek Orthodox Church has coined the term “ecological sin,” referring to a deliberate act of despoiling the environment.

• Hindus in India consider certain heavily polluted rivers sacred, and this paradox — how do you perform sacred rituals using unclean water? — has generated environmental activism.

• In the U.K., and increasingly in the U.S., evangelical Christians “have begun to use language within their tradition” to address the issue of environmental creation care.

Taylor agreed that “green evangelicals” are beginning to have some impact lobbying like-minded legislators on environmental issues. He said some make the argument that the story of Noah’s ark reflects God’s belief in the importance of biodiversity. (Remember, he considered it essential to get every species on board, even if it meant killing off quite a few humans in the flood.)

Taylor cautions, however, that evangelical ecological awareness is a “fledgling” movement, and notes that “in one way or another,” all the major religions “are about divine rescue from this world” and define the religious worldview as one in which “the most sacred place is otherworldly rather than earthly, which fundamentally devalues, if implicitly, the biosphere.”

“The deeper question about remedies is not whether ancient religious forms can reform and thus provide these remedies, but whether new forms of nature-related spirituality might emerge that cohere with a modern evolutionary/ecological worldview, and could provide a basis for environmental concern and action,” he said. “I believe there is strong evidence that such religion is emerging and gathering strength.”

Taylor will explore this emerging movement in his book Dark Green Religion, which will be released by the University of California Press in the fall.

“I’m agreeing with Bly (on the need for a new mythology), but I’m more optimistic than he is about the emergence of mythic forms that cohere with modern, empirical understandings of the origin and diversity of life on the planet — one that would recognize our interdependence with one another and all of these different organisms,” he said. “I see this happening outside the traditional religions, but I see this kind of thinking and feeling influencing some within those religions.”

Taylor believes these “post-Darwinian religious forms” will look a lot like the traditional religions that flourished before the Judeo-Christian traditions, such as animism (which views the natural world as enspirited) and pantheism (which considers the biosphere “part of a divine intelligence”). “All over the world, people are articulating, developing and promoting such spirtualities, sometimes without even knowing it — just by doing the work they do,” he said.

But can this shift in thinking occur quickly enough to move us off of our current, potentially tragic trajectory? Probably not, according to Taylor, who paints a dark picture of a 21st century marked by environmental catastrophes and resulting refugee crises.

“It may take this tragic scenario for people to conclude that these ancient wisdom traditions are not up to the task of helping us figure out how to live in a humane and prosperous way, and we need a new world view,” he said. “But the intellectual work on this new world view is well under way.”

Grim sees this transformation occurring within existing spiritual structures, as traditional religions reclaim a realm they abandoned long ago.

“Many of the traditions, in their ancient expressions, (focused on three) mediations: human to human, human to divine and human to earth,” he said. “But in the Western traditions especially, the human-to-earth exchange was overwhelmed by the emergence of science and technology. The understanding of reality was subsumed by science, and religion retreated from that realm.

“I believe what we’re seeing today is the re-entry of religion into the understanding of cosmology. Religions are beginning to re-engage that question of ‘What is the nature of reality?'”

Taylor believes that question can be satisfyingly answered by a new spirituality that conforms with the truths revealed by science. As he sees it, this new or reformed religion would “consider nature sacred in some way; view all life forms as having intrinsic value, and being worthy of reverence and defense; and generally express a kinship ethic — a sense that all organisms are related.

“We should be careful not to assume that myth or religion will be the decisive variable that will change behavior,” Taylor cautioned. “It may be the fundamental material conditions of life that will be the most decisive.”

“Religions are necessary for many who are making the transition to a more sustainable lifestyle, but religions in themselves are not sufficient,” Grim agreed. “They need to be in dialogue with environmental science and policy communities.”

But Taylor added that, in the long run, a new or reformed sense of spirituality could have “an important and salutary influence” on the future of our species and our planet. St. Francis — who White praised as “the greatest spiritual revolutionary in Western history” — would surely agree.

First things first….

First and foremost you should be paying attention to Christ. He is the Author and Finisher, the Alpha and Omega, the Beginning and the End. Nothing was made without Him. Nothing gets past Him. He is our intercessor and our complete sacrifice. He is the Only One we should be lifting up.

I seek to lift Him up daily. He is the One who wrote Revelation. He is the one who talked to the disciples on the Mount of Olives. He is the ONLY ONE who can open the Scroll with the Seven Seals. No ONE ELSE IS WORTHY! It is not the Antichrist who does it, not the Church, not the world’s religions, ONLY JESUS.

The reason for this, HE is the God who became a living, breathing, bleeding CREATION and DIED and CAME BACK TO LIFE. Anybody who denies this is upholding the spirit of Antichrist. Buddha didn’t die for you, Muhammad did not die for you, Vishnu did not die for you, the planet Venus did not die for you. There is NO OTHER MESSIAH.

That being said, we MUST listen to what He said, “If the master of the house had known at what hour the thief would come he would have stayed awake.”

Jesus did not say this to threaten us, or sell an impossibility. We CAN know the TIME of the End. He said just like we can see the forsythia blooming outside (OKAY the “fig” but we here in Dahlonega have the forsythia and pears busting out…) We should keep our oil lamps filled up and KEEP WATCH. We can know, Paul said we could. Jesus said we could. We could KNOW the season without a doubt. Previous generations could not say that. We can.

We are about to see unprecedented things come upon the world as we know it. I am NOT a conspiracy theorist, I am a disciple of Christ. I do not care what the Illuminati is doing, I care about what the Word says, Satan is and has been doing. And it just so happens that he (I refuse to capitalize his “h” *grin*) is behind nearly ALL of the major world religions, world powers, empires, economic, political, and spiritual. He ALWAYS has been.

Don’t you see? He is the god of this world, the prince of the power of the air, the dragon. He is cast down to earth knowing his time is SHORT. He is seeking those he may devour. He is working in the workers of iniquity. He has “children” of his own. Those who are of the world, slaves to sin, and the realm of the wicked.

He has always operated in this capacity since the garden of Eden. You say, “But God is the Sovereign here.” Yes and no. GOD ALLOWED IT! He ALLOWED Satan to be in control here for the time being, whether we like it or not. That is what happened. You can ask Him why when you get to Heaven. If you’ll just please believe that He did it for the best possible GODLY purposes and TRUST HIM. I’m not going to go into the “problem of evil” here…..thank goodness…..

HOWEVER, Satan is here. He’s at work. He’s doing nasty terrible things nobody wants to talk about. The few who are willing to talk about it are called quacks, fundamentalists, spiritual warfare freaks, doomsayers, apocalyptic maniacs, fear/hate mongers and many other terrible names.

Having said that, Satan is PRIMING the world for Antichrist. He hasn’t had this big of a job since helping Rome conquer her Empire.

For instance, there are now 7 billion people in the world, (not between 200 & 400 million as in Jesus’ day). There are about 195 countries, probably more than 1,000,000,000 TV’s in the world, and 22 major world religions (not to mention the 1000’s of minor ones, and myriads of sub-sects, etc.)….

I believe he has been planning this grand scheme since day 1. Since the Tree. He has been planning it and it is coming to fruition. It has been put on fast forward over the last 100 or so years, but he’s been at it a LONG time.

All he has to do is this: get rid of God. And set himself up as god. No big deal right.

Well it turns out humans are pretty pathetic. They believe that they are wretched, flawed, lonely, small in the universe, unsuccessful at life, and in need of a god. They know their crops fail, their children die, that plagues kill, and that old age wrinkles the body and brittle’s the bones. They have a hard time believing that God does not exist. They look to the skies, build statues, perform rites, and offer sacrifices. They write tomes, go on quests, and seek their souls. They have a deep need for God.

So Satan has to re-write human history and literature, reinvent human technology, and reprogram human thought. He has succeeded.

He has succeeded in doing this since he was allowed to change some rules in the 1800’s. Ideas like this had been around MUCH longer, but they became global in scale, because during that time, EVERYTHING began to be global in scale. The 1800’s was the dawn of globalism. God had kept it nicely in check with flood, confusion of languages, distance, and lack of technological advance. God was about to allow something that had been painstakingly slow previously. He was about to allow the acceleration of human ability and cooperation through technological advances. He pressed the fast forward button on time and history, hurtling us to the end of our very existence, knowing that the fullness of time was about to “come in.”

Planes, trains, automobiles, computers, wireless technology, atom bombs, biotechnology, ALL OF IT. MAJOR MAJOR exponential advances that could have taken humans 1000’s more years to come up with on their own. Who assisted them?
Why the lord of this world, of course. He has been doing it for a long time if you have read the book of Enoch. If not, you can see him doing it through pagan innovation to have more money, power, possessions, longevity, etc.

See, the great Satan wants to make HUMANS gods. He wants to make humans think that they are gods. He knows he does not have the power to overthrow God. He knows he cannot convince them that he is God. But he knows that God did something rather silly, in Satan’s mind anyway it is downright hilarious. He knows that God gave humans the ability to overthrow Him. But only temporarily. In their lifetime. While they are alive, they can throw off God and say, “never the less, I will“. God made humans with the ability to CHOOSE Him. Free will. Choose me, or not. Have it your way.

Why does Satan think this will help his campaign? Because he knows if they throw off God during their lifetime, they are AUTOMATICALLY UNDER HIS MILITARY CONTROL. It’s the rules. He has temporary dominion over earth, he’s the commander here for the time being, and he can have all the people he wants. As long as they dis God.

So back to why he wants humans to think “they” are god…. Humans are rather dumb. They have never seen planets created, universes organized, angels assembled. They are under the shadow of a sin sick, illness laden, black cloud of a planet. They are “new” in the cosmic scheme of things. They are babies. He can control and manipulate them.

Throughout history he has been fooling them with idol worship, animal worship, crazy winged creature worship, land worship, king worship, ocean worship, sky worship, all kinds of insane things. They are easy prey. (Remember how pain filled our lives are, how short-lived, how frail.)

Well now he has the PERFECT religious system to catch them with. It is just a delightful mish-mash of ALL of them. And, as always with Satan, it has just enough of a kernel of truth in it to make it seem truly perfect. If you don’t know any better.


To Be Continued….
See Part II for further elaboration on this not so new religious system.

Climate of World Religion

February 16, 2009

UN Sets Dangerous Precedent with “Defamation of Religions” Resolutions

(look up the UN “defamation of religions” resolutions after you read this)

The basic human right to freedom of expression is increasingly under threat as countries introduce and enforce laws that have been wrongfully legitimized by numerous United Nations resolutions on “defamation of religions.” In a statement sent to the UN Human Rights Council today, Freedom House and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty strongly urged members of the council to reject any further resolutions when they meet in Geneva for the upcoming 10th Session March 2-27, and to further reject any attempts to create international instruments or mechanisms that would prohibit “defamation of religions.”
The statement explains how such resolutions directly violate international law and can encourage countries to increase the repression of religious minorities, political dissidents and human rights advocates. It points to a 2008 joint report by two UN special rapporteurs that soundly rejects the premise that the rights of religious believers are violated by merely hearing statements critical of their faith: “Defamation of religions may offend people and hurt their religious feelings but it does not necessarily or at least directly result in a violation of their rights.” 

Several recent high-profile cases have highlighted the growing conflict between freedom of expression and so-called religious “defamation.” This month, Indian authorities arrested the editor and the publisher of the Statesman, after Muslims protested the newspaper reprinting an article from the United Kingdom’s Independent titled, “Why should I respect these oppressive religions?” The article decried the erosion of the right to criticize religions, including Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

In another case, Random House backed out of a deal last year to publish “The Jewel of Medina,” a fictional novel about one of the wives of Muhammad citing concerns that “the publication of this book might be offensive to some in the Muslim community” and that it could “incite acts of violence.” In September, Gibson Books announced it would publish the book in the United Kingdom, but the publisher’s home and office were fire bombed three weeks later. The book was eventually published in the United States by Beaufort Books.

“Although we are sympathetic to the stated goals of the resolutions of combating intolerance, racism, and religious hatred, we believe that such resolutions do not serve to achieve these goals but rather limit the ability of individuals to raise questions, concerns, and even criticisms at a time when people of all faiths need to engage in more, not less, dialogue,” said Freedom House and the Becket Fund.

The full text of the statement follows:

Concern over UN Resolutions on “Combating Defamation of Religions”

1. On the occasion of the 10th Session of the Human Rights Council, Freedom House and the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty express concern over the resolutions on “combating defamation of religions” adopted by the Human Rights Council and the General Assembly since 1999 [1]. We urge members of the Council to reject such resolutions in the future and further urge them to reject attempts to create international instruments or mechanisms that would prohibit “defamation of religions.”

2. Although we are sympathetic to the stated goals of the resolutions of combating intolerance, racism, and religious hatred, we believe that such resolutions do not serve to achieve these goals but rather limit the ability of individuals to raise questions, concerns, and even criticisms at a time when people of all faiths need to engage in more, not less, dialogue. Moreover, we believe these resolutions directly violate existing international law regarding the fundamental freedoms of expression, thought, conscience and religion.

3. In particular, the resolutions should be rejected on the grounds that 1) the term “defamation of religions” is overly vague, open to abuse, and inconsistent with traditional defamation legislation; 2) the resolutions attempt to provide rights to a belief or idea rather than an individual or group of individuals in contradiction of existing international law; 3) the concept of “defamation of religions” restricts freedom of expression beyond accepted limitations defined in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; 4) the concept of “defamation of religions” violates the universal right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; and 5) the concept of “defamation of religions” falsely equates religious belief with race.

Problems with the definition of “defamation of religions”

4. The term “defamation of religions” has not been clearly defined and is therefore subject to misuse and abuse. The legal term “defamation” is typically defined as the spreading of mistruths intended to harm an individual’s reputation and livelihood. However, by attempting to apply such a definition to ideas or religious beliefs, which by their very nature conflict with opposing ideas or religious beliefs, it is impossible to evaluate whether ideas or religious beliefs represent truths or mistruths. As was noted in the Becket Fund’s “Issues Brief for the OHCHR” of June 2008, “religions make conflicting truth claims and indeed the diversity of truth claims is something that religious freedom as a concept is designed to protect.”[2] Thus, the concept of “defamation of religions” can be defined as the expression of ideas or beliefs that simply conflict with or offend the ideas of others.

5. Further, because the resolutions call on States to enact necessary legislation to prohibit the advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred, it would be left up to governments to define whether ideas expressed are offensive or, in the language of the resolution, “defame” a religious belief. Governments would thus be forced to pick and choose among competing faith claims.

6. In countries with domestic laws that use equally vague or poorly defined language to restrict individuals from “defaming” or “defiling” religions, the government often “picks” the majority religion over minority religions. These laws are frequently applied to punish individuals from expressing questions, concerns and criticisms of the majority religion.[3] The application of similar legal mechanisms at the international level would not only legitimate such existing problematic domestic legislation, but would result in a greater proliferation of such legislation to other countries.

 

Problems with providing rights to a belief or idea rather than individuals

7. International law regarding freedom of religion and expression, as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), has been established to protect individuals and in some case groups of individuals from the violation of their rights. Thus, Articles 18 of both the UDHR and the ICCPR states, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.” (Emphasis added.) Articles 19 of both documents define the right of “everyone” to freedom of opinion and expression free from interference. (Emphasis added.)

8. These documents lay out the right of individuals to hold and express beliefs and ideas and are designed to protect them from discrimination based on their beliefs. However, these documents are not intended to protect the beliefs themselves from criticism or even attack.

9. As the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief together with the Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, xenophobia and related intolerance wrote in a joint report presented at a special seminar on this topic held by the OHCHR in October, 2008.

“Defamation of religions may offend people and hurt their religious feelings but it does not necessarily or at least directly result in a violation of their rights, including their right to freedom of religion. Freedom of religion primarily confers a right to act in accordance with one’s religion but does not bestow a right for believers to have their religion itself protected from all adverse comment.”[4]

Violations of freedom of expression

10. Article 19 of the ICCPR states that, “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice.”

11. The right to free expression and the right to impart information and ideas of all kinds is not intended to be absolute, but rather is restricted by Article 20 of the ICCPR, which calls on signatories to create law prohibiting the “advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.” While this language of the ICCPR is itself overly vague and could be better defined, it is our belief that the term “defamation”-because it can be interpreted so broadly-does not necessarily cross the line of inciting discrimination, hostility or violence.

12. In other words, because the definition of “defamation” can be interpreted to include ideas or beliefs that simply conflict with or offend the ideas of others, the term oversteps the restrictions on free expression laid out in international law and places unnecessary and dangerous restrictions on the ability of individuals to freely express conflicting beliefs or to address disagreements through peaceful public debate. Such restrictions will have the opposite effect of increasing religious intolerance and hatred than what the resolutions on “combating defamation of religions” are purportedly designed to combat.

Violations of freedom of thought, conscience, and religion

13. Article 18 of the ICCPR protects not only the freedom to have or adopt a particular religion or belief, but also protects an individual’s freedom to manifest his religion or belief. [5] As stated in General Comment No. 22, the freedom to manifest religion includes the sharing of beliefs, thoughts, and ideas. [6] It is this right to manifest belief that allows for inter-religious dialogue efforts to occur within the walls of the UN and around the world. Initiatives like the UN’s Alliance of Civilizations [7] and the Saudi Culture of Peace initiative rely upon the free exchange of ideas and beliefs. Yet such initiatives are in direct contradiction to the concept of “defamation of religions.”

Conflation of Race and Religion

14. The conflation of race and religion diminishes the uniqueness of both race and religion. Unlike immutable race, religion involves the freedom to follow one’s conscience, and implies dialogue and debate with others about the truth claims involved. Treating racial and religious discrimination as the same thing thus confuses racist hate speech with debate about (sometimes controversial) competing truth claimsWhereas one can easily identify and narrowly define racist hate speech, it is not nearly so simple to define what falls into the category of “defamation of religion,” which as currently characterized can include any controversial truth claim about someone’s religion. Race-based speech restrictions have never been used to cut off discussion about racial identity, whereas the “defamation of religion” measures by definition prohibit controversial discussion of religious belief.

Notes:

1. Commission on Human Rights Res. 1999/82, 2000/84, 2001/4, 2002/9, 2003/4, 2004/6, 2005/3; Human Rights Council Res. 4/9, 7/19; General Assembly Res. 60/150, 61/164, 62/154, 63/3.

2. “Combating Defamation of Religions,” Becket Fund for Religious Liberty Issues Brief, p. 5 (submitted June 2, 2008).

3. In Egypt, bloggers, such as Abdel Kareem Nabil Suleiman, have been arrested for posting criticisms of Islam. In Pakistan, defiling Islam is punishable by death and insulting another’s religious feelings can result in a ten-year prison sentence. In Saudi Arabia, all Saudis are required by law to be Muslim. Source: Freedom in the World 2008, Freedom House (2008). 

In Russia, television stations of have been sued for blasphemous content in the popular television show “South Park.” Source: “Russian prosecutors in bid to ban South Park” The Times, September 8, 2008. Available at
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4704089.ece (February 1, 2009).

4. Asma Jahangir, Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion and belief and Doudou Diene, Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, “Conference Room Paper #4,” presented at the Expert seminar on the links between articles 19 and 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR): Freedom of expression and advocacy of religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence, Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (October 2-3, 2008).

5. ICCPR Article 18: “Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.”

6. CCPR General Comment 22: 30/07/93 on ICCPR Article 18: “The freedom to manifest religion or belief may be exercised ‘either individually or in community with others and in public or private’. The freedom to manifest religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching encompasses a broad range of acts.”

7. http://www.unaoc.org/content/view/63/79/lang,english/


Freedom House is an independent nongovernmental organization that supports the expansion of freedom in the world. To arrange an interview with Freedom House, contact Laura Ingalls at ingalls@freedomhouse.org or call 1-202-747-7035 or 1-202-683-0909 (cell).

The Washington-based Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is a nonpartisan, interfaith, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions. To arrange an interview with a Becket Fund attorney, contact Tom Carter at 1-202-349-7205 or 1-202-538-2044 (cell) or becketfund.carter@gmail.com.

 


A new faith needed to unify humankind as we march into future

(this guy is clinically insane, but you need to read this article)

We need faith, but the faiths of our fathers are tired now, or are spent forces. We must recognize this.


The Hamilton Spectator

(Feb 14, 2009)

Barack Obama is now leader of the most influential nation on earth. Are we yet capable of dancing to his song of hope?

Obama was elected by default by a desperate nation drowning in faithlessness and cynicism. He was simply the best bet for change.

This bleak outlook is the chronic disease of our day. We are pessimistic about our economic and ecological futures. We distrust government officials, officers of the law, bureaucrats and the principles of big business (while we scramble to enhance our own bottom line.) We doubt the trustworthiness and ambitions of people of other colours and other religions. We have our phones and e-mails rigged to monitor the fidelity of our mates.

We are a society shorn of hope and faith.

Every past society that devolved to a world view only admitting the materiality of the physical world eventually disintegrated. On the other hand, every political and spiritual genius of his particular time understood human nature and its needs. Those superior minds attempted to unite people “in one mind” — of moral rectitude and faith; of faith in the ultimate triumph of goodness.

The vigour of Zoroaster’s religion propelled ancient Persia to world-class status. Alexander the Great and Ptolemy Soter after himrecognized the spiritual need in man and attempted to unite the Greek world with a “universal religion.” Later, Caesar Augustus reinvented and reinvigorated the Roman religion, and Rome survived a few more centuriesConstantine recognized this human need and modern Christianity was bornThen came Mohammed, who lifted a fractious and barbarous people into the most civilized and scientifically advanced empire of the age. (is he actually touting these guys for being men of faith? Doesn’t he know theirs was a “faith” of bloodthirsty raw political power?)

We must seek God … or Goodness (or Love, if you prefer) for our own mental health. Belief is our sustenance as much as is the food we eat and the air we breathe. Spiritual food gives us the confidence to walk into the future with clarity and optimism. A healthy individual and a healthy society must have hope and confidence that the ultimate outcome of all things will be for the good. That is the essence of religion and has been since antiquity(oh yeah, well he hasn’t read or taken seriously the Book of Revelation…)

Strong beliefs bond differing minds and group into a working whole. It creates internally integrated morals — internal laws that need no outside coercion to ensure. (then why did the Puritan’s use public stockades?) It gives us the courage to live justly, and to die well.

***If Barack Obama is indeed the political unifier that Americans — and us — have put our atrophied hopes in, perhaps he will take the steps so necessary to heal his nation of its distrust and cynicism. Perhaps he will have the courage to harness the will to believe in some transcendent goodness. (starting to sound like the Antichrist here dude…)

But he must lead. He must demonstrate how to believe again in what is demonstrably true: That there is something out there that is greater and grander than the individual.

We need faith, but the faiths of our fathers are tired now, or are spent forces. We must recognize this whether we are Muslims, Sikhs, Jews or Christians. ***We are now a global village, and only a global world view will suffice.*** (you can keep your damn global village, that’s where the masacres of Sudan, Ruwanda, and Bosnia Herzegovina occurred.)

As in the past, this new and unifying faith must be novel, vibrant and inclusive. In this new global era of widespread education and immediate communication, this new faith must also be credible. It must align with ***scientifically obtained knowledge yet be aware also of the undiscoverable — the great mysteries that hold us rapt and in awe.

*** The marriage of a believable faith with the husbandry of government is the union that must be contracted.

Only then can there be a United Nations, only then shall we have peace on Earth and goodwill toward all. (damn this is scary…if this doesn’t scare you, you are asleep….)

 

 

 

Mobilising People and Actions for War Richard Peterson (April 13, 2008) – This article is the second of a three part series which compares the legal and cultural changes being made by today’s global government to those made by the Nazis. Part I, Ghost of Nazi Past, Ghost of Nazi Present focused on cultural, media, parliamentary, and judicial manipulations while this part focuses on science, religion, religious education, and spiritual mobilization. The format of this post is as follows: texts in bold font are citations fromRichard Evans’ book The Third Reich in Power. Italicized texts that follow Evens’ citations are quotations from global governance actors along with some of my commentary.

Writing of the hostilities between the Nazis and the Catholic Church, Evans explains “…the German government repeatedly told the Vatican that its fight against Marxism and Communism demanded the unity of the German people through the ending of confessional divisions.” (pg. 241) Today, we see the identical argument being advanced by the Alliance of Civilizations, the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality, et al. In the interest of combating extremism and terrorism we are told a global code of conduct which embraces only common spiritual and political ideologies must be adopted. Contributors to this code of conduct are groups such as the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality which will “activate” the evolutionary process of global consciousness; the Alliance of Civilizations which is currently developing guidelines for how religions must interpret scripture; Religions for Peace which is advancing A Common Word, an initiative designed to undermine religious doctrines and hijack religion; etc. Orchestrated efforts to incite violence against those who refuse to set aside their doctrines—particularly against the monotheistic faiths – have intensified on multiple fronts. Evans writes “Nazism imbued the German language with the metaphors of battle: the battle for jobs, the struggle for existence, the fight for culture…The language itself began to be mobilized for war.” (pg. 214) We are in this same place today. Christians who dare voice an unpopular opinion are accused of having a violent ethos. The existence of the new civilization is threatened if the egocentric are permitted to continue with their “defective disconnection”. It is, as they say, a fight for civilization. Setting the stage for the new religious ethos is Karen Armstrong, Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group member.

**Video posted in original link**

See use doctrine. The full version of the Karen Armstrong presentation can be found here.

Science

One criticism consistently launched against the adherents of the Abrahamic faiths’ is that the doctrines cannot be scientifically proven and the faithful have abandoned rational scientific inquiry. Yet many of the same critics who claim superiority have no problem advancing unproven occult doctrines such as notions of a “planetary spiritual hierarchy”; the existence of the Aryans and Atlantis; evolutionary advancement through Luciferic initiations; etc., etc.

“The real core of Nazi beliefs lay in the faith Hitler proclaimed in his speech of September 1938 in science – a Nazi view of science – as the basis for action.” Pg 259

“But humanity has hitherto lacked an adequate global grammar and a global lens to fully activate this integral/holistic/dialogic technology of mind; and since our living realities are co-created by out patterns of minding, the supreme technological advance in the human condition is this advance to the integral technology of minding.” –
 World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

Religion

Here the comparisons I draw are between the Third Reich’s attempts to control Christianity and the global government’s plans to control the three monotheistic faiths. The below World Commission citations that refer to the egocentric mind refer to individuals who believe their religious texts to be true and are not prepared to abandon their convictions for a new revelation. The egocentric mind also pertains to political dissenters of the globalization process.

“National Socialism is not only a political doctrine, it is a total and all-encompassing general perspective on all public matters. So our entire life has to be based on it as a matter of natural assumption. We hope that the day will come when nobody needs to talk about National Socialism any more…One day, the spiritual awakening of our time will emerge from this will to culture.” – Joseph Goebbels Pg 211

“Our great spiritual traditions and teachers were all in diverse ways fostering and opening the way to the awakening of global consciousness.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“One striking result of the general global law – we are as we mind…But humanity has hitherto lacked an adequate global grammar and a global lens to fully activate this integral/holistic/ dialogic technology of mind; and since our living realities are co-created by our patterns of minding,, the supreme technological advance in the human condition is this advance to the integral technology of minding.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“As an SS plan put it in 1937: ‘We live in the age of the final confrontation with Christianity. It is part of the mission of the SS to give to the German people over the next fifty years the non-Christian ideological foundations for a way of life appropriate to their own character.’…Christianity, Himmler was to declare on 9 June 1942, was ‘the greatest of plagues’; true morality consisted not in exalting the spirit of the individual but in abnegating oneself in the service of the race. Moral values could be derived only from consciousness of one’s place in, and duty to, the chain of ‘valuable’ heredity.” Pg 252

“Perhaps the single most powerful event facing humanity today is a great awakening on a planetary scale that has been millennia in the making. We humans are in the midst of a profound advance as a species to a higher form of global consciousness that has been emerging across cultures, religions and worldviews through the centuries. This awakening…is nothing less than a shift…from more egocentric patterns of life to a higher form of integral and dialogic patterns of life.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“…it should now be apparent that global spirituality is precisely this crossing from egocentric life into the deep–dialogic life of global consciousness: this is the highest telos and consensus of our great planetary spiritual endowment…True Spirituality is the highest expression of our rational essence and is not to be confused with egocentric religious life. Spirituality is the awakening of our highest being, bringing us into direct relation with Reality as the Logosphere; it is the process of self–transformation from ego life to the awakened life of mature Integral Natural Reason and flowing in harmony with the Lawlike Moral Energy of the Logosphere. And Global Spirituality is this awakening of the Global Mind, the highest mature form of spirituality in its global power. Global Spirituality then is Awakened Critical Reason and is thus free of all ego ideology and ego dogma. Now, hopefully, the direct link between global consciousness and global spirituality should be more manifest.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“By 1937 the Protestant Church was either deeply divided between the German Christians and the Confession Church…biblical fundamentalism and Nazified Christianity were equally repellent.” Pg 228

“The egocentric… mind is a stage in our human development (evolution) which tends to separate and objectify the thinking subject from the objects of though, and to remain centered in and privileging its particular worldview (religion, ideology, cultural lens) as the exclusive measure of reality (meaning, truth, fact, value, experience, existence). The egocentric mind is broken off from the Integral Field of Reality and packages, constructs, separates, divides, polarizes, fragments all its touches….ego minding is the primary cause of the spectrum of human pathologies. And the consensus prescription is that to change this mentality is the single most important factor in transforming the human condition.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“Anti-Christian writings of the Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg, who publicly rejected such central doctrines as the immortality of the soul and Christ’s redemption of humankind from original sin. In his book The Myth of the Twentieth Century, Rosenberg excoriated Catholicism as the creation of the Jewish clericalism” pg 238

“Robert Ley, leader of the Labour Front, went even further than Rosenberg in his disdain for Christianity and his rejection of the Divinity of Christ…” pg 251

“Jesus, whom the Muslims regard as a prophet, as in fact do many of the New Testament writers. Luke’s gospel calls Jesus a prophet from start to finish; the idea that Jesus was divine was a later development, often misunderstood by Christians.” Karen Armstrong, Alliance of Civilizations

Karen Armstrong, a apostate and former Catholic nun, is certainly aware that this is considered heresy by the Catholic church and that her words were intended to attack an entire religion. At least the Alliance of Civilizations is no longer attempting to pretend to be something they are not.

Religious Education

“Remoulding the educational system would create a new generation of young Germans who had known no alternative source of values to Nazism. Yet there was of course one area in which such values did persist…That was religion. For reasons of political expediency and caution, the Third Reich had stopped short in 1933 of attacking the Churches and their dependent secular institutions. As it became more self-confident, however, it began to turn its attention to Christianity too, and to seek a means of either converting it to a form more suitable to the new Germany, or, if that did not work, of doing away with it altogether.” Pg 218

“Nazis now launched a sustained campaign to close denominational schools and replace them with non-religious ‘community schools’…Parents were forced to sign prepared statements declaring that they ‘did not want the education of my child at school to be misused by stirring up religious unrest’ Pg 246

“By the summer of 1939, all denominational schools in Germany had been turned into community schools, and all private schools run by the Churches had been closed down or nationalized…By 1939 religious instruction in vocational schools had been reduced to half an hour a week, and in many areas it had to follow guidelines…Parents who objected to these moves…were obliged by the local authorities to withdraw their objection, summoned to special meetings at the school to pressure them to sign their children up for ideological instruction instead of religious education…” pgs 246-247

“The German Christian’s attempt to create a synthesis between German Protestantism and Nazi racism had effectively collapsed…Hitler reluctantly abandoned his ambition of convereting it into the official state Church of the Third Reich. Instead, he ordered the creation of a new Ministry for Church Affairs, established in July 1935 under the 48-year-old Hanns Kerrl…The new Ministry was given wide-ranging powers, which Kerrl did not hesitate to deploy in order to bring refractory pastors to heel…Pastors were banned from preaching, or had their pay stopped. They were forbidden to teach in schools. All theological students were ordered to join Nazi organizations.” Pg 230

Such measures are most likely to succeed if supported by religious education that is based upon a sound interpretation of religious teachings. – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

“Education as we understand it here makes it possible to view with equanimity the completion of the process of secularisation, first of structures, then of society itself, as just one of several possible reflections of a modern way of life. School should give children a clearer understanding of the psychosocial, cultural and sometimes political functions of religion. This sort of approach would undoubtedly help to sharpen and challenge their critical faculties and combat the wilder excesses of particularism. This has fundamental consequences for the educational system, particularly as regards the teaching of religious education. Who should teach religion? Who can make a valid comparison between the different doctrinal elements of religions? We must beware of confusion here. A clear distinction needs to be drawn between religious education in the sense understood by adherents of a faith, which consists of transmitting the values, teachings and liturgy of their religion with a view to the proper practice of that religion (e.g. the Catholic catechism), and the teaching of comparative religion which aims only to instil knowledge about religion and the history of religion. Only the latter forms one of the bases of learning for the intercultural dialogue through education. Religious education of the first kind is perfectly legitimate, but is not relevant to the objective under discussion. Comparative religion should therefore be taught by professional teachers capable of providing a comparative analysis of religions, regardless of their own religious choice, with the objectivity of an expert, not the passion of a devotee. This is an essential choice that will determine the success of the dialogue through education. The difficulty of the exercise lies in integrating religion, which is such a sensitive issue in the Euro-Mediterranean area, into the field of education, taking into account its irreducibility and its mission to provide absolute truth, but without altering the educational philosophy of mutual knowledge based on curiosity, self-respect and openness to the Other.”  Dialogue Between Peoples and Cultures in the Euro-Mediterranean Area

Propaganda & Spiritual Mobilization

“Hitler had created a new Ministry of Popular enlightenment and Propoganda on 13 March 1933 and put Goebbels himself into the Ministry…the Ministry’s task as the ‘spiritual mobilization’ of the German people in a permanent re-creation of the spirit of popular enthusiasm…” pg. 121

“In other words, religions and the institutions that represent them cannot be banned from the public sphere but must be brought in under the leadership of the international civil bodies when it comes to questions concerning mutual recognition, universal justice, and lasting peace.” – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

“The revolution we have made’, declared Joseph Goebbels, on 15 November 1933, ‘is a total one. It has encompassed every area of public life and fundamentally restructured them all. It has completely changed and reshaped people’s relationship to each other, to the state, and questions of existence.’ Page 120

“One striking pattern and disclosure that is of the utmost importance for seeing that entering the global perspective is a dimensional shift….This dimensional shift to the global lens is well beyond a mere “paradigm shift”…It actually taps a deeper ground of Reality – it is an existential shift.” –
 World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“To what extent is the current state of “American civic discourse” dominated by egocentric politics and ego democracy= egocracy? Have we truly matured into a secular civic space? A truly secular civic democracy can only arise through spiritual citizenship. That would be the true American revolution. – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“That is the secret to propaganda: to permeate the person it aims to grasp, without his even noticing that he is being permeated. Of course propaganda has a purpose, but the purpose must be concealed with such cleverness and virtuosity that the person on whom this purpose is to be carried out doesn’t notice at all.” – Joseph Goebbels Pg 127

“What the Nazis wanted from books was demonstrated in propaganda events such as the German Book Week, held annually from 1934 onwards. ‘Sixty million people will be roused at the end of October by the drumbeat of book promotion,’ declared one of the leading organizers of the 1935 event. These ‘days of mobilization’ would ‘implement inner military preparedness from the spiritual angle in the cause of building up our people.’ Pg 162

 

Last November I posted an article, Aligning the Masses, regarding the 2008 Euro-Mediterranean Year of Intercultural Dialogue. The campaign, “Mobilising People and Actions for Dialogue”, intends to mobilize civil society and raise awareness” of 500 million European citizens and develop an active European citizenship which is “open to the world, respectful of cultural diversity and based upon common values”. I had intended to write in-depth analysis on this mobilization project but while looking for a reference document found a blog space called Euro-Med which had already written everything I had intended to cover. I have not read this entire blog, but the previous link contains good information.

“Advertising and design began to incorporate Nazi symbols and to adopt approved Nazi style.” Pg 211

“Symbols can be very effective tools in advancing a cause. The creation of a house or temple of religions or civilizations in as many cities as possible will be a tangibleand important step in this direction.” – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

 

 

Taken from the Watchman Bible Study Blog