Which Religion Supports a One World Government? (Buddhism does not).

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Hitler was influenced by the Rothschilds. Hitler's underlings were more ruthless than Hitler, he was just a pawn. It's part of the myth that Hitler was a political genius, that's like believing George W Bush was a political genius. Regardless, the reformation did not cause the holocaust to happen. The holocaust was caused because they needed a reason for Jews to migrate to Israel to set the stage for the end times.

Man is controlling the end time revelations, not God.

I never said the Reformation caused the holocaust to happen. I said Luther's anti-Semitic writings was an aspect of it. It kept the pulpits quiet to Hitler's anti-Semitic rants. And the current "Replacement Theology" filtering through the churches will enable the 2nd holocaust to happen. One out of three Jews died during the first holocaust. The Bible predicts 2 out of 3 will die at the hand of the antichrist in the Tribulation.

I thought Bush was a master genius that orchestrated the greatest government coverup in the history of the world?? (9/11)

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Lilitu

 

No argument from me about Luther's errors in Israeology.

That's rather an amoral take on Luther don't you think? You reduce his lunatic ravings, racism and religious hatred to mere "errors".

reply to post by NOTurTypical


and because the bible predicts that, man will try and approximate that number. Not everything is cut and dry, there is massive evidence that 6 million Jews did not die during the Holocaust, more like 250,000.

Originally posted by Lilitu

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Lilitu

 

No argument from me about Luther's errors in Israeology.

That's rather an amoral take on Luther don't you think? You reduce his lunatic ravings, racism and religious hatred to mere "errors".

He got his replacement theology from Augustine. I'm not going to argue with you that his views on the Jews/Israel were erroneous.

They were.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

and because the bible predicts that, man will try and approximate that number. Not everything is cut and dry, there is massive evidence that 6 million Jews did not die during the Holocaust, more like 250,000.

Absurd. And God is in control, not man. God declared 2 out of 3 will die because He is outside the space-time dimension and can see that 2/3 will die.

"Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:" Isaiah 46:10

The only way Buddhism could become a one world government is if people collectively understand Buddhism in a type of de-centralized awakening or enlightenment where everyone simply studies Buddhism either with a master or by themselves. Then the world would slowly start to understand the spiritual truths of Buddhism. Either that or a country like China will take over the world and be called "Buddhist" even though they are not about anything originally Buddhist.

Buddhism is spontaneous and is always gaining new recruits but it is in a decentralized manner and is not dependent on one universal church. Everyone has their own interpretation of Buddhism so it becomes a type of personal gratification although there is a true definition of Buddhism that is not just do as you please but that is the beginning step which makes it so attractive to people. It's really just about an alternative to Christianity, in that sense it could be anything, like atheism for some, Buddhism for others, these two are even closely related. No reason Buddhsits and Christians can't interact. The two cultures play off each other, God for Christians, Nirvana for Buddhists. A nice happy world

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Again, I'd vote "no religion at all". (See the video in my sig to learn the difference between "religion" and "redemption")

Are you a Deist? or not? Redemption in regards to Jesus, is Theism, it's religion. Please, don't try and get out of that. "SINS" are Dogmatic preachings of Christianity (as Jins and unholy pork are to Muslims)

Starting to see the contradiction here. You vote no religion BUT you're more than happy to believe in religious dogma (Jesus, ressurectino etc.) And even despite much of it being morally and ethically adbhorrent.

(Come on, i'm being honest here - E.g stoning, genocide, hellfire (Jesus introduced)

Secondly, I didn't 'choose' Jesus. He chose me (John 15:16) and faith in Him was a gift of God's grace (Romans 12:3) not on my own efforts. I thought I explained this earlier??

So which is it? Religion or no religion? Quoting Christian doctrine or not quoting it?

Are you a Deist or a Theist? Simple question? Non of this redemption/religion stuff. Jesus = religion.

It seems you've opted for no religion for the sake of wriggling out of debate, yet you're more than happy to reference scripture by which religions were founded on.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


It's real easy to just cause world events to happen in such a way that it coincides with biblical prophecy, and then have the major media outlets (which are all controlled) broadcast in unison some type of message which corresponds with the religious interpretation of revelation.

The world never ends. The world never reaches peace, but Christians constantly pray for world peace and the rapture, neither will ever happen.

reply to post by filosophia

It's real easy to just cause world events to happen in such a way that it coincides with biblical prophecy

I agree. It's also easy to make a piece of Toast look like an apparition of Jesus or the Virgin Mary.

The world never ends. The world never reaches peace, but Christians constantly pray for world peace and the rapture, neither will ever happen.

The word of reality MAY never end, but certainly the anthropic heat death of the universe will likely destroy our species, rendering them extinct, not before our Sun dies out, or boils our oceans.

While I don't welcome this inevitability, many apocolyptic religious cults do; Their God will save them, he will save their eternal soul. I think this is wishful thinking, and causes harm to our civilisation.

Christians have always preached "the end is nye" even before we knew of our solar system, let alone gallaxy collisions and heat death.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Interesting..

I suggested you watch the video to learn the difference between "religion" and "redemption", apparently that's too difficult for you.

The Pharisees were "religious", Christ was probably the most anti-religious man to ever live. There is a fundamental difference between "religion" and "redemption".

I post here after long consideration to say that I was wrong, Buddhism can in fact bring about a one world government, because modern Buddhism is false when it relies solely on compassion as opposed to liberation

“He is free”, is not a statement made as regards anyone’s deeds or the level of compassion they do or do not exhibit to others.

-Aryanatta, Original Buddhist writer

Modernity, in refutation to Buddhism, has inverted the teachings of Buddhism to imply that mere superficial compassion, secular morality, and merit-making are the core of Buddhism [this superficial view of the path is denied at MN 3.72], and that Buddhism denies empirically the notion of autonomous stasis, i.e. the Soul, the Subjective and ontological nexus of noetic being. There are only two absolutes in Buddhism: “Emancipation of mind (cittavimutti) and emancipation by wisdom (pannavimutti), this is a designation for both ways liberated” [DN 2.71];

compassion is the much overused incorrect word within Buddhism, rather it is philanthropy to propagate the Dharma; the philanthropy of the Buddha was to spread the doctrine of his emancipating law to the peoples who saw his message. The notion today of compassion in a Christian sense of feeding the poor, assisting the afflicted, and doing general deeds of merit based seeking actually has no part in Buddhism.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by Unity_99

 

I explained it in my opening post but will do so again.

Christianity believes the entire world is controlled by God, so there is already a world order. Muslims think the same, as do Jews. Buddhists, however, do not believe in an all-encompassing creator but personal salvation through your own means.

The three major religions all seek a one world government of their own, which is why there are pereptual problems, this directly benefits the powers behind the scenes that make money off of perpetual war. This is how the three major religions support the one world government.

Would war be happening in Pakistan if Christianity did not exist? Or how about Judaism and Islam? Religion is not the sole cause of war, but it is the sole justification of war.

No it's not. Some people justify it by saying they are protecting the country or fighting for human freedom.

Sound bites do not a good argument make.

Originally posted by NewlyAwakened
I don't know if anybody has pointed out the obvious yet, but:

Jesus' two laws were to love God and love your neighbor as yourself.

If everybody followed these laws, in their hearts, there would be no need for government. Certainly no NWO.

The envisioned "Messianic Kingdom", if anything, would look on the outside like a global anarchy. But not a chaotic anarchy; rather, one that works like beautiful clockwork.

Note that this is largely in harmony with the Buddhist notion of bodhicitta.

edit on 1-6-2011 by NewlyAwakened because: (no reason given)

It will be a monarchy.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I know the difference between redemption and religion, i have a dictionary. You're still a theist. and you still follow the doctrine of Christ, upon which organised religion is founded on.

It's not that it's "too difficult" or that i am ignorant. Just that i know your position, and i know what you preach, You are a Theist, where redemption is fundamental to your theistic beliefs or not, it makes no difference.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


I know the difference between redemption and religion, i have a dictionary, i've read books, i've listened to Bob Marley. You're still a theist. and you still follow the doctrine of Christ, upon which organised religion is founded on.

It's not that it's "too difficult" or that i am ignorant. Just that i know your position, and i know what you preach, You are a Theist, whether redemption is fundamental to your theistic beliefs or not, makes no difference.

So it wasn't really "interesting..." at all.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

I know the difference between redemption and religion, i have a dictionary, i've read books, i've listened to Bob Marley. You're still a theist. and you still follow the doctrine of Christ, upon which organised religion is founded on.

It's not that it's "too difficult" or that i am ignorant. Just that i know your position, and i know what you preach, You are a Theist, whether redemption is fundamental to your theistic beliefs or not, makes no difference.

So it wasn't really "interesting..." at all.

Yeah, you're 105% correct, I have no idea what I believe.

reply to post by NOTurTypical


Looking at your posts; it's seems apparent that you know EXACTLY what you believe, and your keane to tell other people about it, you're keane to demonise atheism despite your lack of understanding about the reasoning behind it and the philosophical arguments that are used in debate.

You're obvious crooked compliments only allude to your bitterness for my arguments, and your lack of desire to offer a response to them.

Op is misinformed, nor has he ever read the bible, not even revelation... The New Testament is probably the most anti government literature I have read about ancient times. Most of the disciples did not like the way their government was.

Originally posted by awake_and_aware
reply to post by NOTurTypical

 

Looking at your posts; it's seems apparent that you know EXACTLY what you believe, and your keane to tell other people about it, you're keane to demonise atheism despite your lack of understanding about the reasoning behind it and the philosophical arguments that are used in debate.

You're obvious crooked compliments only allude to your bitterness for my arguments, and your lack of desire to offer a response to them.

Nope, only other people know what I believe.

You've already demonstrated that for us.

Star for you!

To be a Christian is to be in a religious group. To be of Christ (Meaning to do what religion fails to do) is to be a rebel and a maverick.