[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

New World Order
See other New World Order Articles

Title: Are globalists evil or just misunderstood?
Source: Personal Liberty Digest
URL Source: http://personalliberty.com/are-glob ... ts-evil-or-just-misunderstood/
Published: May 17, 2016
Author: Brandon Smithe
Post Date: 2016-05-17 19:57:04 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 13769
Comments: 88

I recently received requests from two different readers, one asking for articles covering the “mindset” of globalists (why they do what they do), and another request for articles covering globalist “occultism.” I find that these two topics are very difficult to pursue with a large number of people for a few reasons:

1) Many people do not accept the reality that a group of financial elitists colluding (conspiring) to obtain total global power even exists. Therefore, in order to delve into the topic of the globalist mindset with these “skeptics,” I would first have to re-cover page after page of evidence showing that they not only exist and collude, but that they openly boast about their plans on a regular basis. This is time consuming, to say the least.

2) For some of the people that do eventually accept the reality of a globalist cabal, the argument eventually arises that “yes, there is collusion, but it is merely driven by greed and profit motive,” and not as nefarious as we conspiracy tin-foil mad-hatters imagine.

3) For others, there is a full acceptance of the reality of an organized globalist cult, but they argue that these people are simply a product of a corrupt and ill-structured socio-political system. That is to say, they think that the globalists are a symptom of the troubles that plague humanity, rather than a cause.

This argument is often made by people promoting their own collectivist agenda in one form or another (socialists, communists, scientific dictatorships controlled by people supposedly much smarter than the rest of us, one world-one mind spiritually unhinged theosophic weirdos, etc.). They claim a new system, their system, is the solution rather than getting rid of the globalists, which they say would only leave a “power vacuum” for more tyrants to take their place.

4)Finally, there are the evangelical revelations seekers obsessed with Armageddon. They fully accept that the globalists exist, that they conspire internationally to gain power and influence towards the goal of a “new world order” and that they are essentially evil minded in their intentions. However, they argue that it is either futile to fight against such people because they are supported by power from somewhere beyond, or they even argue that to fight against the globalists is wrong because it is in defiance of the plan put forward in the Bible.

So, as you can see, it is a veritable circus of horrors whenever I write on the subject of who the globalists really are and what they really want. Beyond that, it is very difficult to examine this subject matter, even with ample evidence, without coming off like a wackaloon.

It is hard enough convincing people of the obvious economic crisis facing America and the rest of the world and convincing them to put in minimal effort to prepare, let alone convincing them of the psychopathic and cult-like nature of the elite behind that crisis. In other words, if you approach someone new to this information cold and hit them right away with tales of luciferians, Washington D.C. child pedo-rings and gay romp power-club parties in the California Redwoods with a giant stone owl called “Molech,” you probably aren’t going to get your foot in the door.

That said, I’ll address the inevitable arguments above very quickly before I begin my analysis of the Globalist mind.

1) Psychopaths tend to naturally gravitate towards positions of power, and despite some foolish assumptions out there that these people are too volatile to play nice with others, they do in fact work together as long as there is a guarantee of mutual benefit.

Elites have conspired throughout history, this is documented fact. I find it amazing that some folks cannot grasp the idea that they might also be conspiring today. If you need documented evidence of such collusion, you are welcome to read my articles The fall of America signals the rise of the New World Order and Order out of chaos: The Doctrine that runs the world.

One might argue that the problem of organized psychopathy cannot be dealt with unless one confronts individual psychopathy. I’m sorry to say that at least 10 percent of the population (according to psychologist Carl Gustav Jung) at any given time has elements of inborn latent psychopathy and at least 1 percent is actively psychopathic. You will never remove psychopathy from humanity. It is an inborn quality. What you can do, though, is disrupt or destroy organizations of people that foster and elevate psychopaths. Organized psychopathy is the real and pressing problem.

2) If you need convincing that the globalists are not just “greedy capitalists” out to make a buck at the expense of the world, check out my article Global elitism: The character traits of truly evil people and read some of their quotes. Their goal is to gain as much power over the masses as possible. They see themselves as modern Pharaohs, not as businessmen. Wealth is a side-note.

3) There have been only fleeting instances of societies without the all-pervasive influence of organized elitism in history. From these minor instances, though, we can see bursts of human potential, productivity and invention, as well as greater respect for inherent conscience and justice. Anyone who claims that the globalists are nothing more than a “symptom” is probably trying to sell you on an ideology rather than a real solution. The fact of the matter is, we have never lived in a world without the influence of globalist conspiracy. They are like a cancer that has turned psychopathy into a religion. Removing the globalists should be a top priority. No system is going to succeed, regardless of how brilliantly conceived, unless the elitists are out of the picture.

I would even venture to say that the people who argue that the globalists are nothing more than a symptom are in fact helping the globalists by distracting activists away from the real task at hand. Playing at philosophy and theoretical society building will not change the existing power structure in any way, nor will it remove the muzzle of a rifle from the back of your head as you stare down at the ditch that is to become your final resting place.

4) The majority of the Bible is composed of stories of good standing against evil, and I simply cannot take anyone seriously who argues that the Bible demands we sit idle in the face of despotism. I don’t believe in the modernized “Left Behind” interpretations of “apocalypse” and even if I did, different groups have been saying that the end times are right around the corner for ages. Frankly, no one knows or will know if such an event of metaphysical proportions is taking place anyway.

Now, I do believe in full-spectrum crisis and societal collapse, because these events have happened over and over again and can even be reasonably predicted according to past indicators. I also believe that current events are rife with such indicators and that a collapse is taking place in stages today. I also know that there are groups of elites engineering this collapse and I know exactly why because they have openly admitted their goals (read my article The economic end game explained). Apocalypse is not my concern. Right and wrong, justice and tyranny are my concerns. I’ll leave the rest to more omniscient and omnipresent beings.

The problem we face is organized evil

Now that the above questions are out of the way we can jump into the core of the problem. And no, the core of the problem is not the “system” we live in per say, or our methodology of living and progressing as a species. Again, there are too many eggheads in the liberty movement that like to pretend they have grand and ingenious new ways of looking at the world, and if only we would just “listen to their brilliant vision” everything would change for the better. When you boil down their philosophies you often find they have no new ideas whatsoever, or that their ideas cannot be implemented because they have not dealt with the elephant in the room — the globalists.

Philosophy without tangible action and verifiable results is ultimately useless in the face of true evil. Intellectual warriors rarely win wars, but they do often die horribly as a result of their naivety and defenselessness.

To answer the question in the title of this article, yes, the globalists are in fact evil and the only misunderstandings are on the part of wide-eyed skeptics that have bought into the idea that “evil” is a moral conception created by religion rather than an inherent quality of human beings. This is false.

As Carl Jung discovered in his studies on the collective unconscious, people are born with inherent and conflicting conceptions and traits, or “dualities.” Good vs. Evil is an important duality we all come in to the world dealing with, it is not a mere product of environment or religious influence. That which is “good” is often dictated by what we call “conscience,” which again is an inherent idea or “voice,” and is only partly influenced by environment. The fact of inherent character traits and universal moral codes is present in anthropological studies as well as psychological studies beyond Jung’s very extensive work.

To define evil, we would have to look at those ideas and actions that are opposite inherent conscience. The globalists have basically constructed a festering belief system around everything that is contrary to our moral compass. I will attempt to dissect some elements of that belief system from a secular point of view. Wish me luck…

Occultism

Occultism in itself is not necessarily “evil,” it only means “secret knowledge.” But the history of occultism is plagued by rather evil deeds and attitudes. John F. Kennedy once warned of secret societies and secret proceedings, and with good reason. For thousands of years, occult groups often withheld valuable knowledge from the masses as a means to influence behavior and control the direction of society. This did not have to be “magical” knowledge, whatever that means. Usually, it was scientific or psychological knowledge.

Say for example that a group of elitists withheld detailed knowledge of an impending economic collapse because this knowledge gave them a feeling of superiority and an advantage that they could exploit to gain power over others. Often, occult knowledge, secret knowledge, is driven by the selfish desire of one group to maintain a sense of dominance over another. Is it evil to withhold knowledge that could save lives for the sake of self-elevation? I would say absolutely.

Luciferianism

So yeah, it’s almost impossible to broach this subject without sounding crazy to people who aren’t already familiar with it. But as requested, I’ll take a stab at it.

Do globalists really believe in a devil with a pitchfork and hoofs and horns? I really don’t know. What I do know is that many of them believe in the ideas behind the mythology of the figure (even Saul Alinsky dedicated his book ‘Rules For Radicals’ to Lucifer).

The Lucifer mythology is one of rebellion, a rebellion against the the Christian God. But how would this translate to elitist behavior? They define inherent conscience and moral compass (checks and balances put in place by God?) as a “restriction” or imprisonment of the individual, and they seem to only esteem individuals as those seeking their own “Godhood.”

The way liberty proponents value individualism is very different from the way elitists value individualism.

Lucifer as a archetypal figure represents a rebellion against everything, including nature. Of course, nature is not a toy to be played with selfishly because catastrophe inevitably results. Moral compass is a guide that keeps humanity from destroying itself, and without it civilizations fall. Luciferianism, at the very least, fosters destructive tendencies. With such people at the helm of entire nations, innocent people will suffer in the scorched path of elites seeking to rebel against inherent moral and natural boundaries, and this is without a doubt evil.

Do what thou wilt

Attributed to Aleister Crowley, a self-professed satanist, you will see this ideology pop up in globalist circles and pop-culture icons alike. Crowley apologists often argue that the quote it is taken from refers to the “law of love.” But the love of what? The love of others, or the love of one’s self? Do what thou wilt as long as it does not hurt others, or do what thou wilt regardless of the consequences?

The latter interpretation is clearly the one globalists have taken to heart. Since elitists consistently treat the lowly masses as vermin that need to be eradicated for the good of the planet, I see little indication that they have the ability to conceive of love, let alone adopt a philosophy of love. Do what thou wilt, however the idea was originally intended, has become a rationale for the globalist propensity of crushing others in the name of “greatness”.

Moral relativism

Evil people are not as immune to the judgments of others as you might think. In fact, many of them become a bit obsessive about people accepting or even praising the things they do. I can only theorize that if in their minds everyone else subscribes to an evil behavior then it is no longer evil, but normal.

Moral relativism is the act of rationalizing a destructive or evil process by claiming a positive end result or intention washes away responsibility. The ends justify the means. Globalists could not care less about the consequences of their actions to others, but they do feel the need to justify those actions in a way that people will embrace. From my observations, the majority of globalist propaganda revolves entirely around the concept of moral relativism, and the lie that good is only about perception while evil is a “gray area,” or an illusion. As Kevin Spacey says in the movie The Usual Suspects, “The Greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist…”

The solution

As stated earlier, it really does not matter what brand of social system we implement. It really does not matter what kind of economic model we employ. It really does not matter if we somehow find a way to promote enlightened thinking on a massive scale. None of it matters if we do not also confront the organized evil of the globalist cabal.

It is interesting how many people strive so hard to avoid acknowledging the fight that is coming by clinging to the notion that the globalists are “misunderstood” or “not important” in the grand scheme of things.

While I work to promote alternative trade models through localism and alternative-security models through community preparedness teams, I also accept that these efforts are a half measure; mere preparation for an unavoidable conflict between people who hold the contents of their conscience dear, those who view the non-aggression principle as an integral part of a free and healthy civilization and the globalists, who hold nothing dear accept themselves, their cult and their ambitions.

Evil is a part of every human being, just as good is a part of every human being. It is a battle we all struggle with until the day we die. But organized evil is something else entirely. It is not something we have to tolerate, and it is something we can change. Until it is expunged from our society, no other solutions can be fully enacted. Therefore, the solution begins with the end of organized evil, and it is a solution I plan to enact in my own way. The solution begins with the eradication of the globalists.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 88.

#1. To: Deckard (#0)

Deckard, I'm a globalist.

I believe in the religious truth of the equality of man before God, and I believe that it is important to strive constantly against the tribalism, chauvinism and racism of men, so that each can see the fundamental humanity in each other, and recognize that, if we are not all brothers and sisters, we are certainly, literally, biologically and spiritually first cousins.

It follows from the fact that we are all family that we all have a duty to take care of each other, that we cannot ignore the suffering of our cousins because they happen to live on a different street, or across a river or an ocean.

This does not mean that we have to adopt a simplistic, wooden-headed redistributionism, but it also means that we cannot cling to a chauvinistic tribalism and know-nothingism either. We are our brother's keeper.

The problems of human want span the globe, and we must work on the most effective scale we can to improve the lot of all of us. With modern communications and modern travel, that means globalism.

Certainly there are globalists whose idea of globalism is that their native empire should conquer and rule the world. All experience has shown that no tribe is numerous enough, strong enough, smart enough or good enough to pull off world empire or anything very close. Any sort of global movement must by the limitations of human and physical nature be federative, not centralized. Global cooperation with local control is the mode.

The best example of this for good is also the oldest and largest of all human institutions: the Catholic Church. Catholicism is globalism par excellence. Of course I'm a globalist. All Catholics are, and always have been, since Jesus sent disciples to the ends of the world and beyond.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-17   21:08:18 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

It follows from the fact that we are all family that we all have a duty to take care of each other, that we cannot ignore the suffering of our cousins because they happen to live on a different street, or across a river or an ocean.

I have no obligation to take care of other people nor of other countries. The reason why this country is so messed up is because we as a nation have failed to keep business within this country. Globalists could care less about other countries as their bottom line is always them first and making that money. When these globalists export our companies overseas, they are not thinking of themselves as their brothers keeper. The mindset of globalists "capitalist" is control of commerce inflow and outflow and who they hire on the same mindset. They love the cheap labor and at the same time tell us "If you work harder you will achieve your dream." Bullshit. That's the mindset they teach to slaves. What they teach to their own "families" is the complete opposite. "You don't work harder, you work smarter."

goldilucky  posted on  2016-05-18   0:23:54 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: goldilucky (#4)

I said I was a globalist. Never said I was a capitalist. I agree with your assessment of capitalists. They store up wealth and do not fulfill their duties.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-18   0:31:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Vicomte13 (#5)

I said I was a globalist. Never said I was a capitalist.

God is a capitalist. You earn it it is yours.

You worship a man. The pope. Fuck the Pope.

A K A Stone  posted on  2016-05-18   7:05:52 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: A K A Stone (#11)

God is a capitalist. You earn it it is yours.

You are only a steward. The steward who misappropriates his Master's things is a thief.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-18   9:34:53 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone (#17)

You are only a steward. The steward who misappropriates his Master's things is a thief.

Isn't that up to God not humans to decide? So forced theft in the name of religion is still just theft not condoned by God because God would will you to give it freely.

So basically if you forced others to give you are not doing God's work and harming his name. You are saying God is incapable of making this happen and you are the only ones that can do this which is mocking God IMHO.

Justified  posted on  2016-05-18   14:30:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Justified (#19)

You are saying God is incapable of making this happen and you are the only ones that can do this which is mocking God IMHO.

No, I'm not. You are spinning evil fantasy tales because you love the idea of the security of money a lot more than you trust God, nothing more.

You hate me for telling you the truth. I feel sorry for you for being so blind. I hope, for your sake, that one day God opens your eyes.

In any event, I certainly won't be able to open your eyes, so I'm going to end our discussion rather than go through another tiresome repeat of the same cycle. You can't serve God and money.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-18   14:44:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: Vicomte13 (#20)

You can't serve God and money.

Exactly. By taken property from others at force you are serving money not God! God does not need you to force others to give. You can no more force those to give to your charity by force of government than moslems can force people to convert to Islam by force of government. In the end all you do is create hate and corruption.

You can not service God and government.

Justified  posted on  2016-05-18   22:29:51 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: Justified (#26)

Yours is an interesting construct. Unfortunately it's contrary to the laws that God actually made for the state he made.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-18   22:58:10 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Vicomte13 (#27)

Unfortunately it's contrary to the laws that God actually made for the state he made.

Christianity is based on self responsibility not forcing others to do as "you" think the bible states.

Once government starts taking religious doctrine into its laws just because someone or some group thinks its the right thing to do corrupt men abuse the law. Never forget government is evil and the bigger and more powerful you make it the more evil it can do.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

Justified  posted on  2016-05-19   8:04:48 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: Justified (#36) (Edited)

Christianity is based on self responsibility

Christianity is based on following Christ and doing what he said. It is not synonymous with the Boy Scouts.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-19   9:14:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Vicomte13 (#39)

Christianity is based on self responsibility

I guess your bible and my bible state different things?

Jesus was no fan of big government/religion. I believe he taught its up to you the individual to do the right thing. Not government to force you to do what "it" thinks is right.

Combining government and religion can only end in corruptions and the disenfranchisement of true religious people. Hypocrisy of a government action in the name of religion can never end well!

You can serve government or you can serve God but you can not serve them both.

Justified  posted on  2016-05-19   9:38:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: Justified (#42)

Jesus was no fan of big government/religion. I believe he taught its up to you the individual to do the right thing. Not government to force you to do what "it" thinks is right.

Apparently you have a Bible in which Jesus was a politician, consumed with the same sort of political obsessions that consume you.

Why don't you quote those passages from your Bible in which Jesus talks about the proper role of government.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-19   9:42:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#83. To: Vicomte13 (#44)

Apparently you have a Bible in which Jesus was a politician, consumed with the same sort of political obsessions that consume you.

No from what I have read Jesus was no politician at all and despised government and big church for its corruption.

It was the big church and big government that went after and murdered Jesus?

Justified  posted on  2016-05-22   11:17:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#84. To: Justified (#83)

No from what I have read Jesus was no politician at all and despised government and big church for its corruption.

Jesus despised hypocrisy.

But where did he condemn "big government" as such, or "big church" either? Those are political positions. Jesus didn't take political positions.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-22   14:26:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#85. To: Vicomte13 (#84)

He spent all his life fighting against big government and big church.

It was big government and big church that murdered him. You want to support both big government and big church?

Justified  posted on  2016-05-22   15:14:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#86. To: Justified (#85)

He spent all his life fighting against big government and big church.

It was big government and big church that murdered him. You want to support both big government and big church?

Jesus was somewhere around 33 years old when he died. The first 30 years of his life are obscure. We know of his conception and birth, that he was taken as a baby to Egypt, and we know that around the age of 12 he went to Jerusalem with his parents and wandered off to the Temple, where he was found by them later, speaking with the sages.

And then we know nothing about him until the last three years of life, more or less, when he engaged in his public ministry.

So no, he did not "spend all his life fighting against big government and big church". Half of his life was spent as a minor child living with his carpenter father and his mother in a Galilean town.

We know that in his childhood, the son of God did not preach against the Temple - he went to it to be circumcised, and he gravitated to it to teach the men there when he was as young as 12.

So you first point the "all his life fighting" business is a fantasy.

Then there is the matter of "big church". "Church" is the English word for "ekklesia", which is what Jesus founded. "Ekklesia" means "those called out an assembly". The "assembly" out of which those who became followers of Jesus were "called out of" was, at first, the synagogues and the Temple of the Jewish religion. There was no "church" to fight against in Jesus' time. He FOUNDED the Church, not fought it.

By "church" you mean the Jewish establishment. You say that Jesus "spent his whole life" (really, just three years) "fighting against it".

This is utterly false in every detail. Starting with his circumcision and his 12-year-old pilgrimage, Jesus made at least two other pilgrimages for feasts to Jerusalem. There are two separate accounts, at different times in his ministry, of him driving money changers and merchants out of the Temple courtyard.

When he did that, he was not "fighting big church" - merchants and money lenders were not ever part of the Temple. He was driving non-religious elements out of the Temple precincts specifically to CLEANSE them of bad influences. He did not seek to destroy anything there. Indeed, he referred to the Temple - the biggest part of "big religion" in ancient Israel, as "His father's house".

He warned people not to swear by the Temple, for it was God's place.

He spoke of the High Priests as "sitting in the seat of Moses".

His first public miracle was at a Jewish wedding in Cana. Jesus did not oppose Jewish traditions.

Jesus spoke in synagogues in the towns to which he went. He did not seek to destroy the structures of Jewish religion. He was driven out of the synagogue of his own town because of some of the things he said there, but what he said there was not "tear this down!", rather, it was that he read Isaiah, and then said that the prophesy in it was fulfilled right there in their hearing - in essence, HE was was the prince who was promised.

That's not "war on big religion".

He met with Nicodemus, who was of the high priestly caste, and discussed the theological points that Nicodemus did not understand. Jesus did not tell Nicodemus to leave the priesthood, or demand that the Temple be torn down. In fact, Nicodemus was the Jewish priest who presided over the rites of Jesus' burial in the tomb belonging to Joseph of Arimathea.

Jesus had disputes with Pharisees, who were NOT priests and NOT Levites - they were laypeople, the Jewish equivalent of fundamentalist Baptist preachers. They were not WITHIN the Jewish Temple structure or the hereditary priesthood. They were lay people outside of all of that who had excessive zeal for ritual purity. Jesus certainly disputed a great deal with THEM, but in doing so he was NOT "fighting big church", because the Pharisees WEREN'T the clergy at all!

Jesus never told men to leave the Temple or to destroy it. He mourned over the destruction that he foresaw for it.

Yes, Jesus was tried and damned by the Temple authorities, the Sandhedrin, in a trial that was a sham of Jewish legal procedure. Jesus was lynched by the Sanhedrin with Roman help. His execution did not transform his life into a lifelong war with the Temple. It did doom the Temple and the priesthood at the hand of Jesus' father.

As far as Jesus fighting against "big government", that's even more ludicrous than the charge that he fought against "big church".

Which "government" was Jesus fighting? The Jewish "government"? What was that, the Temple and priesthood? We've already discussed that? Herod, King of Galilee? Jesus never raised anybody against Herod. He referred to Herod as "that fox" once, when Herod wanted to see him, and said of him "Go tell that fox, 'I will keep on driving out demons and healing people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.'" At Jesus' trial before Herod, he said nothing at all. Jesus never spoke against the Jewish government of his Galilean home. He ignored it.

When it came to the Romans, Jesus also said nothing other than to tell the Jews to pay their taxes to the Romans. He encountered two Roman centurions in the course of his preaching.

The first centurion recognized Jesus' power, asked Jesus to heal a servant and, when Jesus offered to go to the centurions house, the centurion said that all Jesus needed to do was say the word and he knew that his servant would be healed. In response to this Roman military official, Jesus said that he had never seen such faith in Israel. Given that "Israel" included the apostles ranged around him, what Jesus said there was that this foreign, Gentile, Roman government official had more faith than the Apostles themselves. That is hardly damning of the Roman government. It's not praising the Roman government either.

The second centurion, at the foot of his cross, is the first to publicly proclaim "Surely this man was the Son of God." Peter, head of the apostles, had said that to Jesus in the close company of the apostles, and for that statement of faith had been made the head of the apostles. The Roman centurion, executioner of the government, was the second man to proclaim Jesus' divinity, and the first to proclaim it publicly.

The only other encounter with, or reference to, the Roman government during Jesus' life was his trial before Pontius Pilate, during which Pilate twice pronounced the man innocent. He succumbed to fear of a riot and did not do his judicial duty, leading to Jesus' execution, but of him Jesus merely said that he bore the less guilt. And Jesus never made any verbal attack on the Roman government itself, nor on the concept of government. Not ever.

Indeed, after Jesus' resurrection and ascencion, God did one more thing that puts the kebosh on your nonsense about Jesus "fight his whole life against big government".

The first Gentiles baptized, after a special miraculous vision sent by the Holy Spirit to Peter, chief of the Apostles, was yet ANOTHER Roman centurion, Cornelius, of the Legion Italica (an Italian-named man in a legion that was on deployment from Italy), and his entire family.

So, in fact it was three agents of the Roman government - three centurions of the military occupation - that were the greatest exemplars of faith, of public pronouncement of divinity, and the harbinger of the conversion of the rest of the Gentiles. And Pilate, the weak and cowardly judge, twice pronounced Jesus innocent - Jesus was ACQUITTED by the Roman state. He was killed anyway because of Pilate's fear. Jesus wasn't murdered by the Roman government. He was lynched by a mob of corrupt Jewish priests, with the complicity of a cowardly Roman judge.

What you are doing is what Caiphas did. You are consumed with hatred towards government - be it civil or church. And therefore, you're making up a series of false statements. In Caiaphas' case, he was seeking to destroy Jesus. In your case, you are making Jesus say things he never said, giving him positions he never had, because you want to enlist Jesus to your anti- government crusade.

This will not end well of you. Regarding church and state, Jesus said respect the authorities, pay you taxes, but focus on obeying God. He didn't CARE about the authorities, and he didn't CARE about money either.

You are much more concerned with money (particularly taxes) and with power - things of this world. You think Jesus is with you on this. He manifestly was opposed to you. He tells you to stop focusing on the things of this world, pay your taxes and forget about all of that, and focus your eyes on God. And be peaceful, not warlike.

That's the real Jesus. Your Jesus sounds like a Confederate.

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-22   16:25:09 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#87. To: Vicomte13 (#86)

So you first point the "all his life fighting" business is a fantasy.

Yes he spent his life fighting against the big government and church. I guess that part were they were going to murder all the children of his age is not in your bible, either? Do I really need to quote bible verse to make you happy?

Your bible must be different than mine?

They try to kill him from the day he was born so his parents hid him from? Big church and big government. Yes he spent his whole life fighting both big government and big church. Its not even a question its fact!

Big government is for big government and big church is for big church. Im sorry that you have been brain washed into believing something else.

Im sorry but the new Testament is based on
*self responsibility of the individual
*self sacrifice of the individual
*help others who are truly in need as an "individual".[You can't have big government force others to give and redistributes wealth because corruption always rears its ugly head and thats why the individual must give as they see fit to other individuals they see as needy. This can never be done by government without major corruption which in the end steal all the money and the truly needy never see a fricken dime!]

I guess my bible doesn't have the bible verse were
"you must steal from others especially if they are rich and give to the poor even if they do not deserve it"

Justified  posted on  2016-05-22   17:59:28 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#88. To: Justified (#87) (Edited)

Yes he spent his life fighting against the big government and church. I guess that part were they were going to murder all the children of his age is not in your bible, either? Do I really need to quote bible verse to make you happy?

Your bible must be different than mine?

They try to kill him from the day he was born so his parents hid him from? Big church and big government. Yes he spent his whole life fighting both big government and big church. Its not even a question its fact!

Big government is for big government and big church is for big church. Im sorry that you have been brain washed into believing something else.

Im sorry but the new Testament is based on *self responsibility of the individual *self sacrifice of the individual *help others who are truly in need as an "individual".[You can't have big government force others to give and redistributes wealth because corruption always rears its ugly head and thats why the individual must give as they see fit to other individuals they see as needy. This can never be done by government without major corruption which in the end steal all the money and the truly needy never see a fricken dime!]

I guess my bible doesn't have the bible verse were "you must steal from others especially if they are rich and give to the poor even if they do not deserve it"

Jesus didn't spend his life "fighting" anything but Satan.

Certainly Herod wrongly sought to kill him as an infant. His family fled to Egypt, which had the same overarching big government - that of Rome - and that "big" government didn't seek his harm at all. In fact, the BIG government, Rome, never SOUGHT Jesus' harm. A Roman centurion sought him out for a healing.

Jesus was sometimes threatened by crowds - notably in Nazareth - but that wasn't either the government OR the church, but a local mob.

Herod tried to kill him as a child, but Herod wasn't "big" government, he was the Roman equivalent of state government. BIG government , the imperial government, was Roman, and the Romans didn't know a thing about Jesus until Pilate met him at his trial. The Roman law actually kept Jesus alive - by providing the refuge to which Jesus' family could flee in Egypt, and by depriving the local Jewish authorities the ready power to kill him. After convicting him of blasphemy, the Jewish Sanhedrin lacked the power to execute him, and the Roman procurator said "No", twice, before finally being intimidated by a mob into it.

So, BIG government barely features at all in Jesus' life. Jesus heals a centurion's servant, is recognized as Son of God by another centurion, and a third centurion is the first Gentile chosen by God for baptism. Jesus told the Jews to pay their taxes to Caesar. So much for Jesus' war on "big" government.

Littlle government, local "state" government - Herod and the Sanhedrin - conspired to kill him, they conspired to kill Paul too, later. Big government, REALLY big government, Roman imperial government, actually provided the armed peace that prevented the Jews from just killing Jesus because they were pissed off religious fanatics, and saved Paul's life from angry local Jews more than once.

Jesus never preached against government as such. Neither did Paul. And most certainly neither of them preached against Rome, which was the biggest of big government. Jesus pretty much ignored Roman government, told the Jews to pay their taxes to the Romans, and treated Roman officials like people. Paul actually preached obedience to the Roman authorities.

So yeah, if you're going to assert the Jesus spent his life fighting the Roman government, which was the BIG government, you're going to have to cite the verses. You will look in vain. You have the same Bible I do, and what you are looking for is not there.

Jesus FOUNDED the Church. He didn't spend his life FIGHTING it.

What sect do you belong to to believe such nonsense as you have asserted time and again?

The Baptists don't teach that Jesus spent his life fighting the church. Neither do the Episcopalians, the Lutherans, the Presbyterians, the Quakers, the Methodists, the Pentecostals or the Jehovah's Witnesses. The AME Churches don't. No church I have ever heard of preaches that Jesus spent his life fighting the church. They don't because it's NONSENSE, pure and utter.

So yes, by all means line up those passages about Jesus at war with the Romans and at war with the church. "The Book of Nonsense Chapter 3 says..."

Vicomte13  posted on  2016-05-22   19:24:15 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 88.

        There are no replies to Comment # 88.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 88.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com